Punjab National Bank has returned more than ₹22 crore in principal to around 50 account holders affected by the Greater Noida branch fraud investigation, according to a 6 November local report. Fixed-deposit interest remains to be calculated and paid, while police are seeking records concerning suspended staff.
What has changed in the refund process?
A new update in the ongoing Punjab National Bank (PNB) deposit-fraud investigation at the Pi-1/Aichhar branch in Greater Noida says that the bank had returned more than ₹22 crore in principal to approximately 50 account holders by Thursday evening, 5 November 2026. The figures are attributed to bank management in original reporting by Amar Ujala. They should not be treated as the final total amount involved in the case.
This is a material development from the earlier update, which reported ₹7.80 crore paid to 16 claimants. The newer figure indicates that the reported reimbursement exercise has expanded substantially; it is not a new, separate fraud case.
Principal returned, but fixed-deposit interest remains unresolved
The latest report distinguishes between repayment of the deposited principal and interest that affected fixed deposits should have earned. It says principal has reached around 50 customers, whereas the interest component was still being calculated on an account-by-account basis. Affected customers have requested payment of both principal and interest.
Bank management was reported to be reviewing the transaction history and expected interest over the period during which deposit records were allegedly altered. An anticipated payment is not confirmation that interest has already been credited. The article also reports that some customers were still completing know-your-customer formalities before they could withdraw money from the restored accounts.
What remains pending for other claimants?
According to the 6 November report, the bank had received complaints from roughly 60 people about alleged irregularities. After the payments to about 50 account holders, the remaining ten cases were expected to be addressed, with Friday evening mentioned as a target. That was a reported expectation, not a verified completion date or universal repayment guarantee.
The article also describes branch employees working extended hours to help validate and restore affected accounts. This is a report about that branch’s response, not proof of a new official overtime policy or staff-benefit entitlement.
Police investigation and employee allegations
The Beta-2 police investigation remains separate from the bank’s reimbursement process. Amar Ujala reported that police had sought details of suspended bank employees, their duties and possible roles, together with information about destination accounts receiving disputed transfers. The article referred to 35 victims who had approached police. Seeking records or placing an employee under suspension does not establish criminal guilt.
Authorities are examining how the alleged unauthorised account changes could have occurred. The full forensic conclusions, responsibility for individual transactions, definitive losses and eventual court findings were not established by the reports inspected. Different figures in earlier reports reflected different claim sets and stages of audit, so they must not be presented as one reconciled final loss.
What this means for bankers
The case brings renewed attention to credential control, timely customer alerts, authorisation of term-deposit changes, audit trails and evidence preservation at branches. These are relevant operational considerations rather than findings that all PNB branches or employees breached policy. For staff assisting affected customers, the immediate factual distinction is between verified principal refunds, interest yet to be settled, and investigation steps still underway.
Sources and References
Please consult the cited sources and check the exact applicability of any legal or employment change. Corrections are welcomed.
Join the discussion