URRSHILA KERKARversusUNION BANK OF INDIA

                                                           1/5                   901-WP-482-26.odt

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                                              WRIT PETITION NO.482 OF 2026

                          Urrshila Kerkar                                  .... Petitioner

                                 versus

                          Union Bank of India                              .... Respondent
                                                              …....

                          •     Mr. Aspi Chenoy, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Disha Shah a/w
                                Neeha Nagpal a/w Mr. Nikunj Mahajan, Advocate for
                                Petitioner.
                          •     Mr. Kevie Setalvad, Senior Counsel a/w Jehan Lalkaka a/w Mr.
                                Nishit Dhruva a/w Mr. Prakash Shinde a/w Ms. Niyati
                                Merchant a/w Ms. Preeti Agarwal i/b. MDP Legal, Advocate
                                for Respondent No.1.
                          •     Mr. Huzan Bhumgara a/w Ms. Shubhi Dotiya i/b. Desai &
                                Diwanji, Advocate for Respondent No.2-RBI.

                                              CORAM        : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
                                                             RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ.
                                              DATE         : 06th OCTOBER, 2026

                          P.C. :


                          1.              The Petition is filed with the main prayer i.e. prayer

                               clause (a). At the outset, the learned Senior counsel appearing

                               for the Petitioner submitted that he is not pressing the other
MANUSHREE
NESARIKAR
                               prayers in this Petition.
Digitally signed
by MANUSHREE
NESARIKAR
Date: 2026.10.08
11:13:30 +0530




              Nesarikar
                               2/5                       901-WP-482-26.odt

2.            Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondent

     No.1 tendered Minutes of Order. It is taken on record and

     marked ‘X’ for identification. The Minutes of Order are signed by

     the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondent No.1

     Bank. Both the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

     Petitioner and the Respondent No.1 submitted that the clauses

     in the Minutes of Order are acceptable to both the parties and it

     is fair resolution to the questions raised in the Petition. The

     Minutes of Order are as follows :



              “                MINUTES OF ORDER


              1.   Without prejudice to the rights and contentions of
                   Respondent No.1 Bank, and without admitting or
                   conceding any inadequacy or incompleteness in
                   the documents already furnished to the Petitioner
                   through the pen drive, Respondent No. 1-Bank, in
                   the interest of justice and in accordance with the
                   principles of natural justice, shall once again
                   provide to the Petitioner, within five (5) days from
                   today, a hard copy of the document titled "Report
                   on Forensic Review of Cox & Kings Limited"
                   dated    19th     August     2020,     issued    by
                   Pricewaterhouse Coopers Private Limited, along
                 3/5                        901-WP-482-26.odt

     with all annexures and documents forming part of
     the forensic audit material.
2.   No liability or responsibility of whatsoever nature
     shall be attached to Respondent No. 1-Bank or its
     officers or employees by reason of the Bank
     providing such documents in compliance with this
     order. All the rights and contentions of the Bank in
     this regard are expressly preserved.


3.   The Petitioner shall file her Reply to the Show
     Cause Notice dated 19th April, 2024 within
     twenty-one (21) days from the date of receipt of
     the said Report and documents.


4.   Respondent No. 1-Bank shall consider the Reply
     of the Petitioner, if any, and pass a detailed,
     reasoned order within [3] weeks from the date of
     receipt of the Reply.


5.   Respondent No. 1-Bank shall, within [15] days
     from today, take all steps necessary to remove the
     Petitioner's name from the Fraud Monitoring
     Return (FMR) and from the corresponding records
     maintained with or reported to the Reserve Bank
     of India. This is without prejudice to the Bank's
     right to report afresh, if so warranted by the fresh
     order passed under paragraph 4 and in accordance
     with law.
                                   4/5                       901-WP-482-26.odt



                  6.   This order is passed without expressing any
                       opinion on the merits of the matter and having
                       regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of
                       the case. Nothing contained herein shall be
                       construed as extending. modifying, or otherwise
                       affecting the timelines prescribed under the RBI
                       Master Directions on Frauds.


                  7.   All rights and contentions of all parties are
                       expressly kept open.


                  8.   Accordingly, the fraud declaration order dated 16th
                       October 2025 is set aside, solely on the specific
                       facts and circumstances of this matter, and the
                       matter is remitted to Respondent No. 1-Bank for
                       fresh consideration at the stage of the Show Cause
                       Notice.


                  9.   The Writ Petition is disposed accordingly.”



3.                We have considered these submissions and the clauses

     in the Minutes of Order. We are of the opinion that the Minutes

     of Order resolved the issue fairly and squarely. Therefore, we

     accept it.
                                5/5                   901-WP-482-26.odt

4.            The Petition is disposed of in terms of Minutes of

     Order.



5.            It is clarified that there shall be no further demand by

     the Petitioner for any other documents except those mentioned

     in the Minutes of Order.




(RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.)             (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)