In 2013, Bhardwaj alleged that the RBI’s Jammu branch had exchanged currency notes belonging to a separatist group called “Kashmir Graffiti.” He said that he had approached the CBI for a probe but had seen no action.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday (10th Jan) rejected a PIL that accused the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) of exchanging Rs 30 crore worth of defaced currency notes linked to a Kashmir separatist group.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh dismissed the PIL, which called for a CBI investigation into the matter, after the RBI pointed out that petitioner Satish Bhardwaj had been dismissed from the bank and had failed to disclose this fact to the court.
He argued that, according to RBI regulations, only notes in lawful condition could be exchanged, and no stamped currency should have been accepted.
“He seems to be a disgraced employee of a bank,” the Bench remarked to senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, who represented the RBI.
Gupta argued that Bhardwaj’s claim had no basis. Bhardwaj, who appeared in person, referred to a newspaper report about the issue and claimed that the RBI was denying the allegations five years after the PIL was filed.
Justice Surya Kant told Bhardwaj that he had concealed vital information in his petition.
After Bhardwaj admitted to being dismissed by the bank, the Bench stated, “We are not inclined to entertain this writ petition purportedly filed in public interest. It is, therefore, dismissed. However, the issues, if necessary, may be addressed in an appropriate case.”
In 2013, Bhardwaj alleged that the RBI’s Jammu branch had exchanged currency notes belonging to a separatist group called “Kashmir Graffiti.” He said that he had approached the CBI for a probe but had seen no action.
Bhardwaj’s petition contended that the RBI’s act of exchanging defaced or imperfect Indian currency notes worth Rs 30 crore, which were allegedly stamped with separatist slogans, was illegal and warranted judicial intervention. The separatist group, he claimed, had publicly stated on Facebook that between May and August 2013, they stamped Indian currency with separatist slogans.
According to the petition, the RBI Act and the RBI (Note Refund) Rules 2009 did not permit the exchange of defaced notes. The petitioner initially sought a response from the authorities, but received no reply.
After the RBI failed to address his RTI queries and the CBI took no action on his complaint, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court, requesting a CBI investigation into the RBI’s approval of the note exchange. In the petition, he argued:
“The Jammu Regional Branch office of RBI’s decision to exchange defaced or damaged Indian currency notes worth Rs 30 crore, which were reportedly used by a separatist group from Kashmir to destabilize peace and create fear and tension in the Jammu and Kashmir region, is illegal and warrants judicial intervention.”
When the case was heard in 2020, a bench led by then CJI SA Bobde, alongside Justices BR Gavai and Kant, noted that it involved “national interest” and directed SG Mehta to seek instructions. In November 2024, due to the delay in receiving a response, the Court granted the Union a final opportunity to present its position.
Case Title: SATISH BHARDWAJ v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(Crl.) No. 249/2019
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
