Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
karira

"Advisory Notes" given by RBI to banks to be disclosed under RTI

Recommended Posts

karira

RBI issues certain "advisory notes' to Banks, from time to time.

In a recent order, CIC has ruled that these advisory notes have to be disclosed by RBI.

 

The matter concerns advisory notes issued to ICICI Bank.

 

Initially, CIC had ordered disclosure but ICICI Bank had approached Bombay High court and obtained a stay order since it was not heard by the CIC, as per Sec 1994) of the RTI Act. The court remanded the matter back to the CIC.

 

The full order is attached to this post.

Advisory Notes RBI ICICI.pdf

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jj99

and this is more interesting in this order, one can refer this and have details such as Account No, Name of Account Holder, PAN Card used/TAN Cards used, Address used etc

 

"It will rather be too audacious

on the part of a Bank to say that it will not divulge the details of such

fraudsters and scammers because there happens to be a Bank-Customer

relationship which is fiduciary in nature. We are of the opinion that instead

of protecting them under the Bank-Customer contract, each and every Bank

must pro-actively divulge details such as Account No, Name of Account

Holder, PAN Card used/TAN Cards used, Address used etc. in order to warn

other entities not to be duped and uphold the principles of transparency, rule

of law and the Guidelines set out by the RBI itself. It is akin to sending

circulars to the members of the public about the fake currency in circulation "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
murgie

This ruling is amazing. Democracy works! This is the first clearcut ruling I've seen where the case for exemption under s(8) has been carefully examined, and that weighed explicitly against the public interest involved. Cheers! -Murgie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported by PTI in moneycontrol.com on 23 June 2011:

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/currentaffairs/makepublicrbiadvisorynoteissuedtoicicicic_559722.html

 

Make public RBI advisory note issued to ICICI: CIC

 

The Central Information Commission has directed the Reserve Bank of India to disclose an advisory note it issued to ICICI Bank for alleged violation of any RBI guidelines or for contravention of the provisions of money laundering and foreign exchange acts.

 

The case relates to an RTI application filed by S S Vohra, who had sought to know details of such advisory notes issued by the apex bank to Patna and Hong Kong branches of ICICI Bank.

 

ICICI Bank has objected the disclosure of the information citing three exemption clauses of the RTI Act section 8(1) (a), (d) and (e).

 

These section exempt disclosure of information which can -- prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the state, relation with foreign state or lead to incitement of an offence, is related to trade secrets and commercial confidence and is held in fiduciary capacity.

 

During the hearing, Vohra said the Finance Minister had made a written statement in Parliament that Patna branch of ICICI Bank Limited had opened some fictitious accounts for alleged fraudsters for which an advisory note was issued to it in December 2007.

 

Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra said there was "no merit in the contention that the advisory note issued by the RBI to the Bank in the present case will, by any stretch of imagination, fall under exemption clauses" cited by the bank.

 

Rejecting the claims of ICICI Bank that such information may be personal in nature to customers and is held in fiduciary capacity by it, Mishra said opening of fraudulent accounts in a commercial bank is a grave concern and a major setback to financial system of the country.

 

"It would be rather too audacious on the part of a bank to say that it will not divulge the details of such fraudsters and scammers because there happens to be bank-customer relationship which is fiduciary in nature," Mishra said in his order.

 

Mishra said fraudsters, who are part of illegal activities not only need to be penalised in accordance with law but their "fraudulent dealings must also be thrown split wide open in the daylight" to make others careful.

 

The Reserve Bank of India counsel submitted before CIC that during inspections, if RBI finds that some bank is not functioning in accordance with its guidelines and norms, then it exercises two options -- in cases of "extreme gravity" penalises the bank and in matters of "some concerns but not grave enough" it may issue an advisory to the bank.

 

Mishra opined that instead of protecting fraudsters under the Bank-Customer contract, each and every bank must proactively divulge details such as account number, account holder's name, PAN/TAN Cards used, address used etc in order to warn other entities not to be duped and uphold the principles of transparency, rule of law and the guidelines set out by the RBI itself.

 

ICICI Bank had earlier challenged the orders of the CIC to the RBI in this regard before the Bombay High Court which sent the matter back to transparency panel with directions that ICICI Bank should also be heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • Shrawan
      By Shrawan
      RBI sought exclusion from RTI: Govt. doesnot finance us!
       
      The Right to Information Act (RTI) covers all bodies owned, controlled or ‘substantially financed’ by the government. Which should be clear enough, but the Reserve Bank of India didn’t think so. It sought exclusion from the scanner, contending, “We do not come under the Act, as we are the sole financier of the government; the government does not finance us!”
       
      In response, the Central Information Commission has firmly put the Bank in its place by reminding it that RBI was constituted by an Act of Parliament and was therefore squarely within the law’s purview.
       
       
    • maneesh
      By maneesh
      The question was forwarded to me thourgh Private Message:
      Can RBI seek exemption under Section 8(1)(e) of RTI for information related with Cooperative Banks collected as part of their monitoring?

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy