19-08-2025 Item No.32 Subrata Bhattacharyya AR(C) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA No.13770 of 2025 Debashis Banerjee -vs- The Reserve Bank of India Ombudsman-I (ORBIO-I) & Ors. Mr. Dipayan Kundu …for the petitioner Mr. Arnab Sinha Mr. Amartya Basu Ms. S.Das Chowdhury …for RBL Bank 1. The petitioner alleges deficiency on the part of the Ombudsman of Reserve Bank of India in disposing of the complaint lodged by the petitioner without affording any opportunity of hearing to him. 2. It appears that the Ombudsman considered the petitioner’s representation and found that there was no deficiency on the part of RBL Bank Ltd. 3. The complaint of the petitioner is that certain amount stood debited from his credit card online. The petitioner claims to be a victim of fraud. It has been asserted that the petitioner never shared any one time password (OTP) which was generated for the transactions. 4. The details of the transactions are annexed to the writ petition. It is submitted that the timing between the seven transactions which took place on December 10, 2024 between 13.12 hours and 13.19 hours to the tune of Rs.2,99,710.08/- is such that it is humanly not possible to share the OTP within such short span of time. 5. The petitioner further submits that fraud was reported to the bank on the very same day, and that the bank failed to take any steps to trace out the fraudsters. 6. It has been submitted that the bank is regularly debiting amount from the petitioner’s credit card. 7. Prayer has been made to set aside the order of the banking Ombudsman and further restrain the bank from deducting any amount from the petitioner’s credit card. 8. Learned counsel for the bank asserts that the petitioner himself disclosed vital statistics of his credit card to the caller. The fraudsters may have misutilized the details and the amount got debited from the petitioner’s credit card. It has been submitted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the bank. 9. From the documents annexed to the writ petition, it appears that a police complaint was lodged and that the police have investigated the matter and filed a charge-sheet. 10. The petitioner has admitted in his writ petition that he disclosed certain whereabouts of his credit card, such as his card number, CVV number and the expiry date of the credit card. The same implies that the petitioner indeed disclosed his card details to unknown persons. The issue is already pending consideration before the criminal Court. I am of the opinion that the bank cannot be held primarily responsible for the deficiency in service as alleged. 11. In view of the above, no relief can be granted in favour of the petitioner. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. 2 12. Report filed by the bank be taken on record. Affidavit of service filed in Court be also taken on record. 13. All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 14. Certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be made available to the parties. [Amrita Sinha, J] 3