The Supreme Court restored SBI’s punishment against a messenger found guilty of bribery, ruling that disciplinary authorities need not give detailed reasons if they agree with the inquiry officer’s findings. This strengthens SBI’s stand on strict anti-corruption measures.
Delhi High Court Judge Yashwant Varma has been named in a CBI FIR related to a sugar mill cash row. The case involves alleged financial irregularities linked to the sale of sugar mills. The FIR reportedly includes serious accusations against multiple individuals. Authorities are investigating the extent of involvement and financial transactions.
The Supreme Court ruled that banks, specifically State Bank of India (SBI), are accountable for unauthorized transactions. This decision followed a fraudulent case where a customer lost Rs 94,204.80 after being deceived by a fraudster. The court emphasized banks must utilize advanced technology for safety and advised customers not to share sensitive information.
The Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that a lawyer cannot be held criminally liable for financial losses to a bank without evidence of intent to defraud. Charges against an SBI lawyer were quashed as there was no proof of collusion or active participation in a loan fraud scheme, emphasizing the necessity of malicious intent in fraud cases.
![[SBI Service Rules] "Once an Employee Retires, Disciplinary Proceedings Are Void": SC on Post-Service Actions](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/image-58.png?resize=322%2C157&ssl=1)
The Supreme Court of India ruled that disciplinary proceedings against SBI employees cannot start after retirement, as such actions are void unless permitted by law. The ruling clarifies that the employment relationship ends at retirement, emphasizing employers must comply with legal standards when addressing past employee misconduct.
The Supreme Court will hear a PIL seeking a court-monitored investigation into the electoral bonds scheme on July 22. Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra scheduled the hearing after reviewing submissions from lawyer Prashant Bhushan representing Common Cause and CPIL.
The State Bank of India refuses to disclose electoral bond SOPs, citing “commercial confidence” and intellectual property concerns. An advocate’s appeal for transparency has been denied, leading to escalation to the Central Information Commission. This reflects broader concerns about transparency in political funding, highlighting the tension between transparency advocates and institutions prioritizing confidentiality.
Today,22nd April, The Supreme Court issued notice to Jet Airways and the Jalan Kalrock Consortium following a petition by the State Bank of India challenging the NCLAT’s decision regarding the airline’s ownership transfer. The case reflects complex legal and financial dilemmas in India’s aviation sector. The SBI cited outstanding payments and non-compliance with NCLAT’s orders, emphasizing the intricate nature of the proceedings.
![[Electoral Bond Data] SBI Refuses to Disclose Data Under RTI Act](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/MicrosoftTeams-image-23.png?resize=447%2C269&ssl=1)
On Wednesday (10th April): The State Bank of India (SBI) refused to disclose electoral bond data under the RTI Act, citing exemptions related to fiduciary capacity and public interest. This refusal, including the denial of information about the payment to lawyer Harish Salve, has raised concerns about transparency and accountability, undermining democratic principles and public interest. The case may reflect future changes in RTI Act exemptions under the upcoming Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
