Research, Opinions and Reviews:Registered Users can write a blog/article/post up to 2,000 characters. The entire Law Fraternity is keen to hear from Lawyers, Solicitors, Judges and Legal professionals from respective Bar associations, state and territory to share ideas, give opinions and light on important matters.
Net Banking Frauds
The customer obtained a loan of Rs. 20 lakhs from a Public Sector Undertaking Bank and thereafter the amount was fraudulently siphoned from his bank account through four RTGSs without any consent or permission or knowledge of the customer. He then and there agitated the matter before the Banking authorities and Cyber Police Station. But he did not get any relief. The bank on the contrary shrugged off the responsibilities upon the customer. The investigation team of cyber police station filed FRT, showing their inabilities to crack the case. One crucial point came up during this time and that is the OTPs of the fraudulent transactions went to the fraudster's mobile number instead of the customer's registered mobile number.
One application was filed against this cyber security breach on the part of the said bank before the Cyber Adjudicator established under section 46 of IT Act. After hearing both sides it was clear that the faults were on the part of the bank. Even the bank charged interest of more than Rs. 7 lakhs upon the customer for the said loan.
The cyber adjudicator ordered the bank to exonerate the customer from the liability of the loan of R.s 20 lakhs, order the bank to return the interest of more than Rs. 7 lakhs to the customer and Rs. 40 thousand as penalty.
The case is a glaring example of huge cyber security lapse on the part of the bank and it is not always right that all the faults are attributed to common man as per our common experience whenever people approach the bank after net banking frauds, the bank says that it is the customer's faults. It is not always right.
Be alert, be secured.