Archive · 20 Jul 2026
Court Reinstates Canara Bank Employee After 28 Years
A man named Krishan Kumar worked at Canara Bank for 28 years.
The bank fired him in 2009 because they thought he was involved in some fraud.
But the court said the bank didn't follow the right rules when they investigated him.
The court also said that just because someone might be suspected of doing something wrong doesn't mean they actually did it, especially when the punishment is so severe.
So, the court told the bank to do the investigation again and give Kumar a fair chance to defend himself.
The bank said they had proof that Kumar was involved in the fraud, but the court said that proof wasn't good enough.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court overturned the dismissal of Krishan Kumar, a Canara Bank employee with 28 years of service.
The court found procedural lapses in the departmental inquiry and ordered a fresh inquiry with due process.
The bank alleged fraudulent transactions involving over 25 customers, but the court noted the lack of direct evidence.
Kumar's defense argued that he was denied adequate opportunity to defend himself and that no direct evidence linked him to the fraud.
The court emphasized that strong suspicion cannot substitute legally sustainable proof, especially when the punishment is severe.
- Who
- Krishan Kumar, a Canara Bank employee with 28 years of service
- What
- The Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside Kumar's dismissal and ordered a fresh inquiry
- When
- The court order was issued on July 15, 2023, overturning the dismissal orders from May 2009 and November 2009
- Where
- The case was heard by the Punjab and Haryana High Court
- Why
- The court found procedural lapses in the departmental inquiry and noted that strong suspicion cannot substitute legally sustainable proof, especially when the punishment amounts to 'economic death' after nearly 28 years of service
Employee's Defense
Bank's Defense
Evidence and Procedure
Employee's Defense
The inquiry suffered from procedural lapses, including denial of adequate opportunity to defend, introduction of new documents and witnesses, and rejection of adjournment requests.
Bank's Defense
Large-scale fraud involving over 25 customers was proven through documentary evidence, including passbooks, counterfoils, account statements, and deposit slips.
Handwriting Evidence
Employee's Defense
No direct evidence exists to show the employee personally received or misappropriated any money.
Bank's Defense
The employee's handwriting was identified on several disputed documents, indicating involvement in financial irregularities.
Punishment Appropriateness
Employee's Defense
Dismissal is too severe, especially without direct evidence of misappropriation, and the bank failed to establish dishonest intent or conscious participation.
Bank's Defense
In the banking business, where integrity is crucial, dismissal is appropriate once connivance in financial irregularity is established.
- Employee Name
- Krishan Kumar
- Years of Service
- 28 years
- Initial Position
- Clerk
- Promotion
- Special Assistant in October 1990
- Branch
- Barwa branch
- Dismissal Date
- May 2009
- Appeal Date
- November 2009
- Court Order Date
- July 15, 2023