1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order passed by the Fraud Examination Committee by declaring the petitioners’ bank account as fraud.

2. The petitioners rely on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State Bank of India & Ors. –vs- Rajesh Agarwal & Ors. reported in (2023) 6 SCC 1 that a personal opportunity of hearing is required to be provided to the petitioners.

3. The entire Forensic Audit Report was also not served upon the petitioners but only relevant extract was forwarded.

4. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Bank submits that the petitioners never sought for the entire Forensic Audit Report. Nor was any prayer made by the petitioners seeking opportunity of hearing. The conduct of the petitioners implies that the petitioners were not prejudiced by the act of the Bank and accordingly, the Bank proceeded in terms of the circular of the RBI and declared the petitioners’ bank account as fraud.

5. According to the petitioners an opportunity to examine the entire Forensic Audit Report ought to have been provided otherwise the petitioners will not be in a proper position to defend their case.

6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down in Rajesh Agar