Sarish Mittal v. Central Bank Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 108+234 I.


 Date of Decision:- 12.01.2026 SARISH MITTAL ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND ORS

...Respondent(s)

II.

   

 SARISH MITTAL ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ORS.

...Respondent(s)

  




 !

"

 #




 


 SANJIV BERRY

Present:

Mr. Harsh Chopra, Advocate, (arguing counsel) Ms. Sukriti Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Bhardwaj, Advocate (through V.C.) for respondent No.1 in CWP21849422023.

Mr. H.S. Bhatia, Advocate for Mr. R.S. Bhatia, Advocate for respondent No.1 in CWP22121022023, Mr. Gaurav Goel, Advocate (through V.C.) Mr. Teginder Singh, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4 in CWP21849422023 Mr. Indresh Goel, Advocate for respondent2RBI. * * * *

 !

"

 

$%& 1.

The present petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, being essentially aggrieved by the declaration of fraud made by respondent No.1, against the petitioner on 05.04.2022. SANDAL SHARMA 2026.01.15 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment




   

 -22.

During the pendency of this petition, learned counsel for the lead Bank has drawn the attention of this Court to a letter issued on 09.01.2026, which is taken on record as Annexure 'X' to the effect that all the fraud flaggings have been removed in Accounts No.3243252100, 3353074446 and 3212534725 of M/s KSM Spinning Mills Limited in CBS and that the FMR(s) in the CIMS portal of RBI have been withdrawn on 05.01.2026.

3.

Learned counsel for the lead Bank, who appears virtually, also assures that the consequential complaint filed with the Police against the petitioner is in the process of being withdrawn. 4.

As per learned counsel for respondent2Bank, the aforesaid action has been taken based on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of
  

 


! " In view of the above and while reserving the right of respondent2Bank to initiate the process again, if occasion arises and if so advised, but only after following due process of law as laid down by the Apex Court in 's case (
), the present petitions stand disposed of.

6.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

 !



 #


 (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE    '

S.Sharma i) Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No ii) Whether reportable?

Yes/No SANDAL SHARMA 2026.01.15 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment