$~73 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1308/2026 RAJ KUMAR ROY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kirtiman Singh, Sr. Adv with Ms Shruti Kanodia, Ms Ishita Jain, Mr Ankit Bhandari, Ms Sejal Gupta, Mr Ritwik Saha, Advs.

versus RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR .....Respondent Through: Ms. Tanya Chowdhary, Ms. Manisha Singh Advocates for R1 Ms. Gupta, Adv. for R2 (Appearance not give)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 05.02.2026

1. The matter was listed on 30.01.2026 and was allowed on the same date. The matter is listed today for detailed reasoned order.

2. This order is being passed in continuation of the order dated

30.01.2026 as under:-

“

1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers: -

“a) Issue an appropriate Writ or Direction quashing/setting aside the Impugned Order dated 14.01.2026 (received on 21.01.2026), Show Cause Notice dated 22.03.2024 (received on 01.04.2024) issued by Respondent No. 2 and all proceedings emanating therefrom, classifying the Petitioners as fraud under Master Directions on Fraud Risk Management in Commercial Banks (including Regional Rural Banks) and All India Financial Institutions dated 15.07.2024, as amended/replaced from time to time, and all proceedings or actions initiated or taken consequent to such declaration;

b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Direction directing the Respondent No. 1 to ensure that Respondent No. 2 does not initiate action against the Petitioner under the Master Directions on Fraud Risk Management in Commercial Banks (including Regional Rural Banks) and All India Financial Institutions, 2024 dated 15.07.2024 in violation of the this Master Directions and in violation of principles of Natural Justice;

c) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Direction directing Respondent No. 2 to withdraw any communication, notice or intimation issued to any third party or persons (including law enforcement agencies, if any) by Respondent No. 2 regarding the illegal and arbitrary declaration of the Petitioner as fraud;

d) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Direction directing the Respondent No. 1 to initiate appropriate proceedings against the Respondent No. 2 for their arbitrary and malicious conduct and abuse of power provided under Master Directions on Fraud Risk Management in Commercial Banks (including Regional Rural Banks) and All India Financial Institutions, 2024 dated 15.07.2024 ; and”

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Chief Executive Officer – EPC and director of M/s Lanco Infratech Limited (“LITL”)

3. On 16.06.2021, the respondent No. 2 Bank classified the account of LITL along with the petitioner as ‘fraud’ in terms of the Reserve Bank of India Master Directions on Frauds – Classification and Reporting by Commercial Banks and Select FIs dated 01.07.2016 (“Fraud Master Directions, 2016”). Subsequently, the respondent No. 2 Bank de-classified the said account as fraud.

4. Thereafter, on 22.03.2024, the respondent No. 2 Bank issued a Show Cause Notice (“Show Cause Notice”) alleging that certain transactions in LITL’s accounts appear to be fraudulent and the petitioner received said Show Cause Notice on 01.04.2024. The petitioner vide reply dated 05.04.2024 requested the respondent No. 2 Bank to provide copy of Forensic Audit Report and other underlying documents, to enable the petitioner to effectively represent himself and respond to the Show Cause Notice.

5. The respondent No.2 Bank passed the impugned Order dated

14.01.2026 (“impugned Order”), declaring the petitioner as a “fraud”.

6. Hence, the present petition.

7. Mr. Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, states that the Forensic Audit Report is the most basic document on the basis of which the impugned Order has been passed and the same was not provided to the petitioner. Additionally, all other documents relied upon in the Show Cause No