SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Bom) 199

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BHARATI DANGRE, MANJUSHA DESHPANDE
Subodh C. Korde – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Through Ministry of Finance, Mumbai And Ministry of Communications, Department of Telecommunications, New Delhi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr.Sharan Jagtiani, Senior Advocate with Mr.Priyank Kapadia, Ms.Sapna Pande i/by Mr.Akshay Pansare.
For the Respondents:Mr. Prateek Seksaria, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ishwar Nankani, Mr. Huzefa Khokhawala, Mr. Karan Parmar, Mr. Kartik Gupta i/b M/s.Nankani & Associates, Mr.Mayur Khandeparkar with Mr.Mayur Bhojwani, Mr. Ulrik Jehangir, Ms.Dhamini Nagpal, i/b M/s. Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co., Adv. Prasad Shenoy with Ms. Aditi Phatak and Ms. P. Zaiwalla i/b BLAC Co., Mr. Ashutosh Mishra with Mr. Vinit Jain, Mr. Ashok R. Varma and Mr.Gaurav Mhatre, Mr.M.M. Pable, A.G.P., Adv. Aparna Shrivastava i/b Reliable Legal Partners, Mr. Prakash Shitole.

Table of Content
1. petitioner victim of cyber fraud via unauthorized transfers (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 15 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72)
2. rbi circular limits customer liability to zero (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
3. writ maintainability against private banks argued (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 30)
4. writ jurisdiction applies for rbi guideline enforcement (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50)
5. public function test renders banks amenable (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56)
6. zero liability applies; bank must refund amount (Para 57 , 58 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 79 , 80)
7. sim swapping enabled fraud, no customer negligence (Para 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78)

JUDGMENT :

Bharati Dangre, J.

1. The Petitioner, a freelancer in Business Consultancy, has approached this Court stating that he is a victim of Cyber fraud and a sum of Rs. 38,04,000/- was unauthorizedly withdrawn from his two bank accounts maintained with HDFC Bank Ltd., in a time gap of 41 minutes. According to the Petitioner, he was defrauded by the online unauthorized withdrawals, the transac

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top