RBI Imposes ₹4.30 Lakh Penalty on Bhind Jilla Sahakari Kendriya Bank and Valuefin India Credit Services
The Reserve Bank of India has imposed monetary penalties totalling Rs 4.30 lakh on two regulated entities, a district central cooperative bank in Madhya Pradesh and a non-banking financial company. Both orders are dated 11 August 2026 and were announced by the RBI on 13 August 2026. The cases involve two different compliance areas: transfer of unclaimed deposits to the Depositor Education and Awareness Fund, and prior RBI approval for a change in shareholding of an NBFC.
| Entity | Penalty | Provision under which imposed | Lapse |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jilla Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Bhind, Madhya Pradesh | Rs 2.50 lakh | Section 47A(1)(c) read with sections 46(4)(i) and 56 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 | Failure to transfer eligible unclaimed amounts to the DEA Fund within the prescribed period |
| Valuefin India Credit Services Private Limited | Rs 1.80 lakh | Section 58G(1)(b) read with section 58B(5)(aa) of the RBI Act, 1934 | Change in shareholding above 26% of paid-up equity capital without prior written permission of RBI |
Jilla Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Bhind
According to RBI Press Release 2026-2027/884 dated 13 August 2026, the bank was penalised for contravening section 26A read with section 56 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Section 26A deals with the Depositor Education and Awareness Fund, into which banks must move eligible unclaimed amounts. Section 56 applies the Act's provisions to cooperative banks.
The lapse came to light in a statutory inspection of the bank conducted by NABARD with reference to its financial position as on 31 March 2025. The RBI found that the bank had failed to transfer eligible unclaimed amounts to the DEA Fund within the prescribed period. On that basis the RBI concluded that a monetary penalty was warranted.
For district central cooperative banks, NABARD carries out the statutory inspection, while the RBI imposes the penalty under the Banking Regulation Act. This case shows that a NABARD inspection finding on unclaimed deposits can lead directly to RBI enforcement.
Valuefin India Credit Services Private Limited
According to RBI Press Release 2026-2027/883 dated 13 August 2026, the NBFC was penalised for failing to obtain the prior written permission of the RBI for a change in shareholding in excess of 26 per cent of its paid-up equity capital. The issue arose from correspondence with the RBI relating to the company's request for post-facto approval of the acquisition of shareholding or control of more than 26 per cent of its paid-up equity capital.
A notice was issued asking the company to show cause why a penalty should not be imposed for non-compliance with the RBI's directions. After considering the reply and the oral submissions made at a personal hearing, the RBI found the charge sustained. The penalty was imposed under section 58G(1)(b) read with section 58B(5)(aa) of the RBI Act, 1934.
The case is a reminder that for an NBFC, approval for a large change in shareholding has to be taken before the change happens. Seeking post-facto approval after the shares have already changed hands does not cure the breach.
Scope of the orders
In both press releases the RBI states that the action is based on deficiencies in regulatory compliance and is not intended to pronounce upon the validity of any transaction or agreement entered into by the entity with its customers. Each penalty is also without prejudice to any other action the RBI may take against the entity.
What compliance teams and auditors should check
- Banks, including cooperative banks, should run periodic reports of unclaimed accounts, identify amounts that have become eligible for transfer and move them to the DEA Fund within the prescribed time, with reconciliation of the amounts transferred.
- NBFC boards and company secretaries should treat any proposed transfer of shares or change in control that could take shareholding past 26% as requiring prior RBI permission, and build this check into the share transfer and investment approval process.
- Auditors reviewing these areas should test actual transfers and approval dates against transaction records, not only the existence of a policy.
- Finance teams should account for any penalty in the period in which the order is received and track remediation of the underlying lapse.
Updated on 27 September 2026: added the two RBI press releases, the penalty for each entity, the order date, the legal provisions, the NABARD inspection reference and the specific lapses found.
