Supreme Court: State Must Be Impleaded When Relief is Sought From Public Exchequer  ||  SC: Student Fees Cannot Be Increased Mid-Course Except in Exceptional Circumstances  ||  Supreme Court: ED's Delay in Sending Arrest Order Does Not By Itself Invalidate Arrest  ||  Supreme Court: Appeal Limitation Runs From NCLAT Order Pronouncement, Not Certified Copy Receipt  ||  Gujarat High Court: Waqf Tribunal Has No Supervisory Authority Over Waqf Board  ||  Kerala High Court Orders Aadhaar Fingerprint Comparison to Trace Sreekrishnapuram Murder Culprits  ||  Delhi High Court: Unnatural Death at Police Station Alone Cannot Establish Police Negligence  ||  Orissa High Court: Teacher Scolding Student for Intoxicant Use is Not Suicide Abetment  ||  Supreme Court: Drug Users are Victims and Focus Must Be on Breaking the Supply Chain  ||  Supreme Court: Non-Signatories May Join Arbitration When the Dispute Affects Their Rights    

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