Bombay HC: Railway Employee With Valid Privilege Pass is Bona Fide Passenger Despite Missing Entries  ||  Delhi High Court: Mere Pleadings Made To Prosecute or Defend a Case Do Not Amount To Defamation  ||  Delhi High Court: Asking an Accused To Cross-Examine a Witness Without Legal Aid Vitiates The Trial  ||  Delhi High Court: Recruitment Notice Error Creates No Appointment Right Without Vacancy  ||  Supreme Court: Subordinate Legislation Takes Effect Only From its Publication in The Official Gazette  ||  Supreme Court: DDA Must Adopt a Litigation Policy To Screen Cases and Avoid Unnecessary Filings  ||  Authorities Holding Public Auctions Must Disclose All Known Encumbrances and Related Litigation  ||  SC: Compensatory Allowances Must Be Included While Computing Overtime Wages U/S 59 of Factories Act  ||  SC: NGT Has No Jurisdiction to Decide Disputes Relating to Building Plan Violations  ||  SC: Evidence is Often Fabricated Using AI And False Allegations are Rampant in Matrimonial Cases    

RBI imposes monetary penalty on The Bapunagar Mahila Co-operative Bank Ltd., Ahmedabad, Gujarat- (Reserve Bank of India) (16 May 2024)

MANU/RPRL/0328/2024

Banking

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has, by an order dated May 8, 2024, imposed a monetary penalty of ₹2.00 lakh (Rupees Two lakh only) on the Bapunagar Mahila Co-operative Bank Ltd., Ahmedabad, Gujarat (the bank) for non-compliance with the directions issued by RBI on 'Placement of Deposits with Other Banks by Primary (Urban) Co-operative Banks (UCBs)'. This penalty has been imposed in exercise of powers vested in RBI, conferred under the provisions of section 47A(1)(c) read with sections 46(4)(i) and 56 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949.

The statutory inspection of the bank was conducted by RBI with reference to its financial position as on March 31, 2023. Based on supervisory findings of non-compliance with RBI directions and related correspondence in that regard, a notice was issued to the bank advising it to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed on it for its failure to comply with the said directions.

After considering the bank's reply to the notice and oral submissions made by it during the personal hearing, RBI found, inter alia, that the charge of breaching prudential inter-bank (counterparty) exposure limit was sustained, warranting imposition of monetary penalty.

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. Further, imposition of this monetary penalty is without prejudice to any other action that may be initiated by RBI against the bank.

Tags : PENALTY   IMPOSITION   NON-COMPLIANCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved