SUBASH RAI
RHENOCK, 07 Aug: A retired soldier has been stung by what can only be called a vulgar scam in which his ignorance about banking procedures and his retirement dues has been exploited to rob him of his money, allegedly by a Business Facilitator engaged by the Rhenock branch of the Central Bank of India. Confusion regarding the role and scope of activities of “Business Correspondents/ facilitators” at banks is not new, and from the elaborate details the accused in this case managed to secure about the savings account of the retired soldier, it is obvious that he had access to more information than he is authorized to.
Sukbir Subba, 57, retired as a Naik from the Defence Security Corps of the Indian Army last year after serving there for 19 years. Before this, he was in the regular army for 15 years. Now settled at Kingston-Rhenock in East Sikkim, he has accused one Roshan Thapa, a Business Correspondent/ Facilitator with Central Bank of India, Rhenock Branch, of having pilfered Rs. 2.60 lakh from his account by convincing him that it was part of an amount which had been deposited into his account by mistake.
When a distraught, and obviously confused Naik Subba narrated the elaborate process by which he had been parted from his money, it became apparent that his ignorance about banking procedures and his own pension dues could be easily exploited. It was only a chance discovery by a well-meaning fellow retired armyman that alerted the family to the con played on them and led them to the realization the amount told to them as having been “mistakenly” entered into their account was always meant for them.
SCOPE OF ACTIVITIES FOR
BUSINESS FACILITATORS
As per a Reserve Bank of
India circular issued on 25 January 2006 to Chairmen and CEOs of all scheduled
commercial banks including RBBs on "Financial Inclusion by Extension of
Banking Services - Use of Business Facilitators and Correspondents":
2. Business Facilitator Model: Eligible Entities and Scope of
Activities
Under the 'Business
Facilitator' model, banks may use intermediaries, such as, NGOs/ Farmers'
Clubs, cooperatives, community based organisations, IT enabled rural outlets of
corporate entities, Post Offices, insurance agents, well functioning
Panchayats, Village Knowledge Centres, Agri Clinics/ Agri Business Centers,
Krishi Vigyan Kendras and KVIC/ KVIB units, depending on the comfort level of
the bank, for providing facilitation services. Such services may include (i)
identification of borrowers and fitment of activities; (ii) collection and
preliminary processing of loan applications including verification of primary
information/data; (iii) creating
awareness about savings and other products and education and advice on managing
money and debt counselling; (iv)
processing and submission of applications to banks; (v) promotion and nurturing Self Help Groups/
Joint Liability Groups; (vi) post-sanction monitoring; (vii) monitoring and handholding of Self Help
Groups/ Joint Liability Groups/ Credit Groups/ others; and (viii) follow-up for
recovery.
2.2 As these
services are not intended to involve the conduct of banking business by
Business Facilitators, no approval is required from RBI for using the above
intermediaries for facilitation of the services indicated above.
According to Naik Subba, before the scam began, he had Rs. 11,67,398 in his account on 31 May 2012, including the retirement dues which the army deposited into his account on 11 May 2012.
Around a month later, Roshan Thapa, a Business Correspondent with the bank arrived at his home on a Sunday, claiming to have been deputed by the bank to inform him that some extra amount had been transferred into his account by mistake and that they had to report to the bank and resolve the issue. Naik Subba informs that even the Bank Manager, B Das, had accompanied the Business Correspondent at the time. The Bank Manager, when asked to confirm the news, said that he was there on the day [on some other business nearby] and did not enter Naik Subba’s home and hence is not aware of what conversation transpired there.
“On reporting at the Bank the next day, we found that a sum of Rs. 4,53,344 had been deposited into our account [on 30 May 2012],” informs Meena Kumari Subba, wife of the Naik Subba who had accompanied her husband along with Sukbir Tamang, also an ex-army man from the same village.
Mrs. Subba alleges that Mr. Thapa, the Business Correspondent, informed them that this amount of Rs. 4,53,344 was not theirs and had been entered by mistake and told her husband to sign four blank withdrawal slips so that this amount could be withdrawn and returned to its original owner. They were also warned of legal complications if they refused to oblige, Mrs. Subba adds.
“I signed four blank withdrawal slips and handed them over to Roshan Thapa,” Naik Subba concurs.
They did not suspect anything amiss.
Interestingly, on 20 July 2012, the husband and wife, along with Sukbir Tamang, were at the bank again on some work. While there, the Business Correspondent approached them again and said that another Rs. 40,000 needed to be withdrawn from their account because the pension dues of another retired soldier from Kopchey nearby had been mistaken credited to them. The couple made the withdrawal and handed it over to Mr. Thapa to deliver to said ex-army jawan since the Business Correspondent also hails from Kopchey.
They still did not suspect any thing wrong.
It was only on 27 July 2012, when Naik Subba, who was ill at the time and in need of some money, requested his friend Sukbir Tamang to withdraw Rs. One lakh from his account and issued his a cheque. A few days later, when Mr. Tamang updated his friend’s pass-book, he noticed that on the day he withdrew Rs. One lakh for his friend, another Rs. 80,000 had been withdrawn the same day with a self withdrawal slip. He knew his friend was too unwell to have withdrawn the money himself on that day and alerted the couple.
When the couple checked the pass-book, they noticed that Rs. 2.20 lakh had been withdrawn without their knowledge.
The pass book and the victim’s statements shows that the four blank withdrawal slips signed by the Naik Subba were utilized on 13 June [Rs. 80,000], 06 July [Rs. 30,000], 18 July [30,000] and 27 July 2012 [Rs. 80,000]. And then there was the Rs. 40,000 they had withdrawn themselves and given to the Business Correspondent on being told that it was not theirs.
Convinced that something foul was afoot, the couple arrived at the Rajya Sainik Board in Gangtok yesterday to enquire on their pension details. Interestingly, while they were on their way, they received a call from the Business Correspondent informing them that some mistakes had happened in their account and that it will be rectified after this month.
It was only then that he told them that the Rs. 4,53,344 that he had told them had been deposited into their account by mistake was actually their own money and that the letter regarding the same will be handed over to them within a couple of days.
Sure enough, enquiries at the Rajya Sainik Board confirmed that the amount was part of Naik Subba’s pension dues and had been released into his account. One may be reminded here that the amount is reflected in Naik Subba’s account on 30 May 2012. It was only after the couple raised a noise and even approached the police that a photocopy of the letter intimating the release was handed over to the couple by the bank late last evening.
Interestingly, when all the parties were at the thana in connection with the issue that the Business Correspondent sprung another surprise and stated that the Rs. 40,000 [claimed from them on 20 July] was a loan he had taken from Sukbir Tamang. The moment he said so, Mr. Tamang, who was also present at the thana, lost his temper and challenged the assertion. The Business Correspondent also claimed that the blank withdrawal slips signed by Naik Subba had been torn up and disposed by him in front of them. This too has been challenged by the couple as untrue.
Interestingly, despite the unauthorized access the Business Correspondent obviously had to bank account details at the branch, the Branch Manager sought to distance himself from the issue today.
“Whatever happened was between third parties and the Bank is not responsible for it. Roshan Thapa is not an employee of the bank,” he said.
But later when challenged his statements in front of the senior officials of Rhenock Thana as to how a person who was not a staff of the bank was handling banking procedures, Mr. Das maintained that Business Correspondent had certain rights to handle in the bank operations.
“I’ll fully co-operate in the investigation,” he however assured.
As things stand, the Bank Manager have been directed by the police to produce all documents pertaining to the case and resolve the issue immediately.
“If the Bank fails to satisfy the complainant, we will take over the case and start our investigation immediately,” assured G Pradhan, Second OC at the Rhenock Thana.
There is obviously a lot here that needs deeper investigation along with the possibility that Naik Subba might not be the only person stung.
