Kotak Bank Manager, Another Accused, Arrested in Rs 145-Crore Panchkula Municipal Corporation FDR Irregularities Case

Kotak Bank Manager, Another Accused, Arrested in Rs 145-crore Panchkula Municipal Corporation FDR Irregularities Case

Get latest articles and stories on India at LatestLY. According to officials, the ACB registered an FIR dated March 24, 2026, at the ACB Police Station, Panchkula, after detecting serious irregularities in fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) and bank accounts maintained by the civic body at Kotak Mahindra Bank's Sector-11 branch in Panchkula. India News | Kotak Bank Manager, Another Accused, Arrested in Rs 145-crore Panchkula Municipal Corporation FDR…

Fake FDRs, Missing Funds: ₹160-Crore Scam Linked To Kotak Mahindra Bank Under Investigation

Nearly ₹150–160 crore belonging to the Panchkula Municipal Corporation has allegedly been siphoned off through fake Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) linked to Kotak Mahindra Bank, triggering a major financial probe in Haryana. The discrepancy surfaced when the civic body attempted to withdraw the maturity proceeds of a fixed deposit worth about ₹58-59.5 crore but found the funds had not reached its account despite bank records suggesting otherwise.…

One More Feather In Kotak Bank's Cap, Rs 160-Crore FD Fraud Hits Kotak Mahindra Bank Haryana

At Kotak Mahindra Bank, ₹160 crore in fixed deposits did not erode, fluctuate, or get delayed – it simply did not exist. A fixed deposit is supposed to be the safest place your money can sit. No volatility, no surprises, no ambiguity. And yet, in this case, ₹160 crore didn’t just lose value – it …

Kotak Mahindra Bank FD Fraud: Dileep Kumar Raghav Arrested In ₹160 Crore Panchkula Case - PUNE PULSE

Bank files FIR, begins reconciliation as probe into missing fixed deposits linked to municipal funds intensifies In a major development in the alleged fixed deposit fraud case linked to the Panchkula Municipal Corporation, Haryana Police have arrested Dileep Kumar Raghav, a former relationship manager, in connection with discrepancies worth ₹150–160 crore. The case revolves around