A local report dated 5 November 2026 says Bharatiya Kisan Union protesters temporarily locked an Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank branch in Budhana, Muzaffarnagar, while two bank officials were inside. Police and a revenue officer intervened. The protest concerns customers' disputed deposits; a reported repayment timetable remains an assurance, not confirmed payment.

What was reported at the Budhana branch

A local report published by Dainik Dehat on 5 November 2026 describes a confrontation during a continuing depositor protest outside the Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank branch in Budhana, Muzaffarnagar district. The publication reports that Bharatiya Kisan Union activists temporarily locked the bank premises while two visiting officials were inside. The account names them as Navdeep Singh and Ajay Pratap Singh and describes them as senior regional or divisional bank officials. Their precise designations have not been independently confirmed through a bank document.

According to the report, Budhana tehsildar Bhupendra Singh and police personnel attended the scene, the door was opened and the officials were able to leave. The source does not establish any injury, arrest or criminal charge arising from this episode. This is an attributed account of a workplace-safety incident, not a judicial conclusion that anyone committed an offence.

Why depositors had been protesting

The immediate dispute concerns alleged irregularities in customers’ savings, deposit and other accounts at the Budhana branch. These are serious allegations under investigation; they must not be described as proven personal criminal liability of any bank employee.

Earlier reporting by Amar Ujala on 29 October said members of the Bharatiya Kisan Union had maintained a demonstration outside the branch. That report attributed a figure of approximately ₹8.56 crore in irregular transactions to an audit inquiry being undertaken by officials from Lucknow. It also quoted senior manager Nitin Verma as saying that no customer claims had yet been paid at the time of that report and that payments would depend on verification and approval from the Lucknow headquarters.

Dainik Dehat’s later report described protesters alleging a higher overall loss of roughly ₹15–16 crore. This is a protest-side estimate and must not be substituted for the earlier ₹8.56 crore figure attributed to investigators. Neither number is a final audited loss or recovery figure established by the reporting available for this article.

Repayment window mentioned, but not confirmed as an executed decision

The 5 November report says regional manager Ajay Pratap Singh told those present that he had discussed the issue with the general manager and that customer payments were expected to begin between 13 and 16 November 2026. The report also describes a similar assurance from the tehsildar.

Those statements are reported assurances, not proof of a formally notified settlement, payment instruction or money already credited. The bank’s original written payment schedule, if issued, was not available for independent inspection. The farmers’ organisation reportedly said its protest would continue until affected customers received the full amounts claimed, including interest sought by the protesters.

Questions that remain unresolved

  • Safety: whether the branch or police recorded a formal complaint about locking the premises and whether any protective measures have since been introduced.
  • Accounting: the final number of affected depositors and the audited value of disputed transactions.
  • Customer claims: which accounts have been verified and whether any repayments actually began after the statements reported on 5 November.
  • Official response: whether Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank has issued a written clarification about the incident, audit or customer-claim process.

Staff safety and customer grievance resolution are separate, important concerns. A customer’s right to press for an investigation does not justify threats or coercive confinement of employees; equally, the reported lock-in does not settle the financial allegations. Neither the bank nor police were independently interviewed for this report.

Sources and References

About this report
Please consult the cited sources and check the exact applicability of any legal or employment change. Corrections are welcomed.