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    

Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes and Protection of Depositors’ Interests Bill, 2015 - (03 May 2016)

MANU/PIBU/0414/2016

Banking

The suggestion period for ‘Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes and Protection of Depositors’ Interests Bill’ may have closed on 30 April 2016, but what do the proposals promise?

The Bill is a culmination of measures suggested by an Inter-Ministerial Group identifying gaps in the existing regulatory framework for ‘deposit taking’. Basically, it bans entities not supervised by any regulator or government body from taking deposits.

Unregulated deposit schemes, like pyramid schemes, have been used to swindle depositors out of enormous sums of money. The Saradha chit fund in West Bengal and PACL are examples of schemes that have solicited thousands of crores of rupees from investors looking for ‘big returns’ in a short time. The schemes are usually allied with other ‘promises’ such as a job or property to lure investors.

Tags : UNREGULATED DEPOSITS   PYRAMID SCHEMES    

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved