The Blue Grid Files
Read 23 of 24

Who is the victim

Published 3 October 2026

In a fraud case the complainant is usually clear. Here the bank paid the money back, is also the employer of many of the accused, and asked to be treated as the injured party.

Monday, 28 September

The Statesman reported a prosecution-sanction order that described the position. The bank, it said, had suffered a principal loss of about Rs 646 crore and should be treated as the victim; the CBI had also traced a hawala trail. The same report cited the bank's disclosure that it paid affected entities Rs 645.59 crore plus applicable interest. The significance is legal. A victim can be heard on bail, on charges and on compensation. A bank that is both victim and employer of the accused will find its two roles tested.

The bank has also asked the Special CBI Court at Panchkula to be treated as a victim. The decision, at the time of writing, is awaited.

Tuesday, 29 September

The ED conducted raids on 14 premises, UNI reported the next day, tracing cash transfers through jewellers. The headline there carried Rs 657 crore as the fraud figure. It is the CBI's combined figure, discussed in chapter 18.

Friday, 2 October: what was known before the FIR

This morning ThePrint published a report by its writer on the bank's internal side. Its headline says a bank executive raised an alarm months before the FIR, and an internal inquiry led to two firings. It is the first sourced account in this file of what the bank itself knew before the circular of 18 February. The report is the outlet's, and the bank's response to it is, at the time of writing, not in the sources reviewed. It matters because chapters 1 to 12 describe the allegations, and this report concerns a response to them.

What the record does not yet say

Each of those is a factual question that a document or a witness will answer. None is answered in what this file has been able to read.

Get the next file

One email when a new file is published. No paid service needed.