$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010537042024 + W.P.(C) 11729/2024 & CM APPL. 48793/2024, CM APPL. 70143/2024 DEVENDER MOHAN SAXENA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Chinmoy Pradeep Sharma, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Manu Padalia, Mr. Bhanu Sanoriya, Mr. Aditya Agarwal, Mr. Ujjwal Chaudhary, Advs. versus BANK OF BARODA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Brijesh Kumar Tamber, SC with Mr. Vinay Singh Bist, Mr. Yashu Rustagi, Ms. Chanchala Tiwari, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R % 05.08.2026 1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers :- “a) Allow the present Writ Petition and quash the Impugned Show Cause Notice dated 21.06.2024 bearing No. ZO/ND/RISK/2024-25/34 calling upon the Petitioners to show cause as to why their account should not be reported as fraud in terms of the Master Directions on fraud classification and reporting by commercial banks and selected Financial Institutions, 2016; b) Allow the present Writ Petition and restrain the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:56:37 Respondent Bank from initiating any further proceedings against the Petitioners herein; c) Direct the Respondent Bank to disclose as to whether the names of the Petitioners are removed from the Fraud list in terms of the Directions of this Hon'ble Court vide Order dated 12.05.2023 in W.P. (C) No. 5087 of 2020…” 2. Mr. Sharma, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, states that the impugned show cause notices are fundamentally flawed as they do not concern the petitioners. 3. He states that the petitioners were never directors of Brys International Pvt. Ltd. (“Brys”) but were directors of Neo Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd (“Neo”). 4. The Forensic Audit Report (“FAR”) only deals with irregularities of M/s Brys and not M/s Neo. Hence, the show cause notice qua the petitioners is fundamentally flawed. I am of the view that the respondent has only issued a show cause notice alleging certain irregularities against the petitioners. The petitioners have duly replied to the said show cause notice taking all these objections in their reply. 5. Suffice to state at this stage that the fraud committee while disposing of the show cause notice will deal with categorical reply made by the petitioners in their reply to the show cause notice and pass a speaking order thereupon. 6. In case the petitioners are aggrieved thereafter, the petitioners will be at liberty to approach the Court in accordance with law. The needful should be done expeditiously and not later than 8 weeks from today. 7. The order so passed shall be communicated to the petitioners This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:56:37 individually. 8. With these directions, the petition is disposed of. JASMEET SINGH, J AUGUST 5, 2026/sp This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:56:37