S/L 24 14.07.2026 Court. No. 25 Sourav WPA 11786 of 2026 Harish Bagla Vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors. Mr. Jatin Sengtal Mr. Satadeep Bhattacharya Ms. Sriparna Mitra Mr. Debartha Chakraborty Ms. Ankita Sikdar … for the petitioner. Mr. Sailendra Kr. Tiwari Mr. Shambhu Mahato Ms. Muskan Jalan … for the respondents. 1. The affidavit-of-service filed by the petitioner is kept with the record. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application challenging the impugned order dated March 24, 2026 wherein the bank has declared the petitioner as fraud on the ground of misappropriation of funds and criminal breach of trust. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not argued the matter on merit. He has only prayed before this Court for giving one opportunity of hearing so as to enable the petitioner to file supplementary reply to the show-cause notice. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in correctional home in connection with the criminal case and he is suffering from cardiac and gastrointestinal illness and he is under medical treatment. He further submits that time and again the criminal court has also directed the concerned authority for providing medical assistance to the petitioner who is in correctional home. Due to his medical ground, he is not in a position to file supplementary reply to the show- 2 cause notice and the bank has passed the impugned order by declaring the petitioner as ‘fraud’. 4. Learned counsel for the bank raised objection and submits that on the earlier occasion also the bank has passed an order for declaring the petitioner as ‘fraud’ and the said order was challenged by the petitioner before this Court and this Court found that the said impugned order was passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner without supplying certain documents which were relied in the show-cause notice and accordingly, this Court had set aside the said order with a direction to the bank for supply of documents and the petitioner was given liberty to file supplementary reply to the show-cause notice, if any, documents supplied by the bank. 5. Learned counsel for the bank submits that in terms of the order passed by this Court, the bank has supplied the documents to the petitioner on February 7, 2026 but in spite of receipt of the documents, the petitioner failed to file the supplementary reply in terms of the leave granted by this Court on the earlier occasion and as such, the bank has no other alternative but to pass the impugned order declaring the petitioner as ‘fraud’ on the ground of misappropriation of funds and criminal breach of trust. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. Perused the materials on record. 7. Initially, the bank has passed an order by declaring the petitioner as ‘fraud’ on August 29, 2025. The said order was challenged before this Court by way of a writ application being WPA No. 28686 of 2025. By an order 3 dated January 13, 2026, this Court has set aside the impugned order and directed the bank to supply Forensic Audit Report to the petitioner through the pendrive or through the email within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. 8. This Court has given liberty to the petitioner that on receipt of the Forensic Audit Report, the petitioner shall file their supplementary reply to the show-cause notice within a period of four weeks and on receipt of the supplementary reply, if any, against the Forensic Audit Report, the bank shall pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of four weeks thereafter. 9. In terms of the order dated January 13, 2026, the bank has supplied the Forensic Audit Report to the petitioner on February 7, 2026. The petitioner in spite of receipt of the Forensic Audit Report has not supplied any supplementary reply to the show-cause notice as per liberty granted by this Court by an order dated January 13, 2026. The bank has waited till March 23, 2026 but the petitioner has not filed any reply within a period of four weeks. Accordingly, the bank has passed the impugned order. 10. This Court finds that time and again, one or the other reason the petitioner is challenging the order passed by the bank declaring fraud. This Court found that the Forensic Audit Report was not supplied to the petitioner, this Court has set aside the order and directed the bank to supply the Forensic Audit Report and in terms of the order the bank has supplied the report to the petitioner but the petitioner has not filed any supplementary reply 4 to the show-cause notice after receipt of the Forensic Audit Report. 11. In spite of an opportunity granted to the petitioner, he failed to file supplementary reply, thus this Court did not find any illegality in the impugned order passed by the bank dated March 24, 2026. Accordingly, WPA 11786 of 2026 is dismissed. 12. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that though the petitioner has argued the matter on the medical ground of the petitioner but the said ground has not been taken in the writ petition. 13. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)