Nagpur: The Nagpur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has held State Bank of India’s Tumsar branch responsible for failing to take necessary action after receiving a timely complaint about cyber fraud.
The commission directed the bank to refund ₹5,00,250 to the complainant along with 9% annual interest from July 18, 2021. The bank has also been ordered to pay ₹30,000 towards compensation and litigation expenses.
The case relates to cyber fraud involving complainant Vindhyan Meshram’s bank account. According to the complaint, on July 18, 2021, Meshram contacted a customer care number regarding a defective product purchased online. He subsequently received a call from a person claiming to help him obtain a refund. Acting on the caller’s instructions, Meshram installed an application on his mobile phone.
He later discovered that ₹5,00,250 had been withdrawn from his bank account through 13 separate transactions. Various online payment gateways were shown as beneficiaries in the transactions. After noticing the withdrawals, Meshram immediately informed the bank, got his bank account and debit card blocked and approached the police. He also filed a complaint on the government’s cybercrime portal on July 19, 2021.
FCRF Launches CP-FRM to Build India’s Next Generation of Fraud Risk Professionals
Appearing for the complainant, advocate Mahendra Limaye argued before the commission that the bank had been informed promptly about the fraudulent transactions but failed to conduct an internal investigation, monitor the transactions or take effective steps to prevent the transfer of funds. He also raised concerns about deficiencies in the bank’s transaction-monitoring and velocity-check mechanisms.
The complainant alleged that instead of tracing the source of the fraudulent transactions and identifying the beneficiaries who received the money, the bank attempted to place the responsibility on the customer. SBI, however, denied liability and argued that Meshram had shared the OTP and had been negligent while handling the transaction.
The commission rejected the bank’s defence. It observed that the circumstances indicated that the OTP and other necessary information had not been intentionally shared by Meshram but had instead been fraudulently obtained by a third person. The commission also noted that the complainant had informed the bank within 24 hours of discovering the fraudulent withdrawals, provided details of the debited amounts and sought reversal of the transactions.
The commission held that the bank failed to take necessary precautionary measures and appropriate action after receiving the complaint. It therefore found the bank deficient in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The commission directed SBI to refund the entire ₹5,00,250 to the complainant along with 9% annual interest calculated from July 18, 2021. The bank was also ordered to pay ₹30,000 towards compensation and litigation costs. The order underscores the importance of prompt action by banks after receiving complaints about fraudulent transactions and the need for effective monitoring of suspicious fund transfers.
Follow for daily updates on cybercrime, corporate fraud, DFIR, hacking, investigations, and digital forensics
