A senior manager at Central Bank of India’s Ruma branch in Kanpur has reportedly approached cyber police over allegations that account operators pressed bank staff to enable a corporate bulk-payment facility and used an apparently altered bank statement. A news report dated 6 November 2026 says police registered a case and began examining the complaint. The allegations remain under investigation.

What the Kanpur Report Says

A report published by Hello Banker on 6 November 2026 describes a complaint made by a senior manager at Central Bank of India’s Ruma branch in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh. According to that report, the manager approached the cyber police station after questions arose over a bank statement and over persistent demands to enable a bulk-payment service for a recently opened current account. The report attributes the account of events to the manager’s complaint; this is not a judicial finding.

The report says a current account was opened for a business several months earlier. Individuals associated with the account allegedly sought activation of the Corporate Internet Banking (CIB) bulk-upload facility, which is used for submitting multiple payments electronically. Bank employees initially explained that the facility could not be enabled immediately on the newly opened account and referred to a period of regular transactions.

Allegations of Pressure on Branch Employees

The manager reportedly complained that repeated demands continued after that explanation. The report describes concern and stress among employees handling the account. Such statements are allegations made in the reported complaint, not findings of an internal staff inquiry or police determination of harassment.

According to the same report, the bulk-upload facility was eventually activated. It says numerous account transactions followed over the next two to three days and that a cyber cell subsequently placed a hold on ₹58,35,175. The source does not independently establish that this amount was a confirmed fraud loss, that it has been returned or that any employee was complicit in wrongdoing.

Why a Bank Statement Was Questioned

The manager reportedly noticed inconsistencies in a statement that reached the branch. As described in the report, an account number appeared to relate to a different branch while other details referred to the Ruma-branch business account. The report also says an allegedly forged statement was shared in connection with an account held at another bank, apparently to support a request for bulk-payment access there.

The original disputed statement, account-opening records and electronic transaction trail were not available for independent inspection. It would therefore be premature to describe a forged document as proven, identify a completed scam or conclude that any bank failed its verification duties. Any alleged role of the account operators must be assessed through the investigation and applicable court process.

Reported Police Status and Unanswered Questions

Hello Banker reports that a police case was registered. It attributes to a local police official the position that an investigation is underway and further action will depend on established facts. This publication could not independently examine the FIR or an official police press note. No arrest, charge-sheet, conviction, final bank loss or staff disciplinary decision has been verified from the available material.

Further reporting should distinguish the precise amount held, the ownership of the disputed statement, whether the bulk-payment facility was used as alleged, and what action police or the bank formally confirm. Any accused person’s reply and subsequent findings should be included when attributable evidence becomes available.

What the Incident Means for Bank Staff

The report is relevant to branch staff because the alleged dispute arose during account servicing and access to a payment feature. It illustrates why the status of an account, documentary consistency and escalation of unusual requests matter to the day-to-day work of bank employees. It does not, however, establish a new RBI requirement or a bank-wide change in Central Bank of India’s corporate internet-banking rules.

Employees and managers should rely on their bank’s current written procedures and the bank’s authorised internal reporting routes when handling suspicious documents or persistent requests. The account in this news report is not a substitute for an operative bank circular or police record.

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.