SC: Appeal U/S 374 CrPC/415 BNSS is Not Maintainable Against Sessions Court's Reversal of Acquittal  ||  SC Asked the Centre to Promote Awareness About the Consequences of Driving With an Expired Licence  ||  SC Explains How a Deceased Christian Wife's Property Devolves under the Indian Succession Act  ||  Supreme Court: Reach Stacker isn't a Motor Vehicle; MACT Claim Not Maintainable  ||  Supreme Court: Lift Makers, Operators and Owners Share Responsibility for User Safety  ||  Patna HC: Pressure to Sign Divorce and Child Custody does not Amount to Cruelty  ||  Bombay HC: Externment under the Police Act Requires Satisfaction About a Gang's Activities  ||  Bombay HC: False Travel Distance Claim Alone Doesn't Constitute Misappropriation  ||  J&K&L High Court: Interest on Delayed Gratuity is Not a Mandatory Pre-Deposit For an Appeal  ||  Meghalaya HC: Meritorious Candidate Cannot Be Denied Admission For a Two-Minute Delay    

RBI imposes monetary penalty on The Bharat Co-operative Bank Limited, Bengaluru, Karnataka- (Reserve Bank of India) (05 Dec 2022)

MANU/RPRL/0561/2022

Banking

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has imposed, by an order dated November 28, 2022, a monetary penalty of ₹ 5.00 lakh (Rupees Five lakh only) on The Bharat Co-operative Bank Limited, Bengaluru, Karnataka (the bank) for non-adherence / violation of directions issued under Exposure Norms and Statutory / Other Restrictions - UCBs. This penalty has been imposed in exercise of powers vested in RBI under the provisions of Section 47A(1)(c) read with Section 46(4)(i) and Section 56 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (AACS), taking into account the failure of the bank to adhere to the aforesaid directions issued by RBI.

This action is based on deficiencies in regulatory compliance and is not intended to pronounce upon the validity of any transaction or agreement entered into by the bank with its customers.

Background

The inspection reports of the bank based on its financial position as on March 31, 2020 and March 31, 2021, revealed, inter alia, that the bank's investment in commercial paper breached the prudential individual exposure limit of 15% of capital funds. Based on the same, a Notice was issued to the bank advising it to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed for non-compliance with the directions.

After considering the bank's reply and oral submissions during the personal hearing, RBI came to the conclusion that the aforesaid charge of non-compliance with RBI directions was substantiated and warranted imposition of monetary penalty.

Tags : PENALTY   IMPOSITION   NON-COMPLIANCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved