Bombay HC Dismisses Plea Alleging Wrongdoing by RBI in 2016 Demonetization

The Bombay High Court has emphasized the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) critical role in shaping the country’s economy and discouraged courts from delving into the monetary regulatory framework. The court made the observation while dismissing a petition alleging misconduct by RBI officials during the 2016 demonetisation policy.

A division bench of Justices A S Gadkari and Sharmila Deshmukh rejected the petition filed by Manoranjan Roy, who claimed to be a tax volunteer. Roy sought an independent investigation into alleged wrongful activities by certain RBI officials during the demonetisation of Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes.

In its order, the bench characterized the petition as a fishing inquiry based on incomplete information. It highlighted that the RBI’s issuance of legal tender is a statutory function supported by expert committees and should not be questioned on frivolous grounds. The 2016 demonetisation notification was deemed a “policy decision” by the court, and it stressed the presumption of bona fide intentions behind such decisions, unless proven otherwise.

The Court asserted the RBI’s significant role in shaping the country’s economy and urged courts to refrain from intervening in the monetary regulatory framework unless a compelling need for independent investigation is demonstrated. The court found no grounds to warrant an inquiry or investigation, as the petitioner’s allegations lacked evidence of any wrongdoing.

It further noted that the petitioner had persistently sought an investigation into RBI’s functioning since 2016, but failed to provide substantial evidence or reports from independent financial experts to support his claims. Consequently, the court regarded the present petition as a fishing expedition based on insufficient information from RBI’s annual reports and Right to Information (RTI) disclosures.

Roy’s plea alleged that specific RBI officials failed to follow proper procedures and assisted certain beneficiaries in exchanging unaccounted old currency notes during demonetisation. The petitioner relied on RBI’s annual reports from 2016 to 2018, claiming that the legal tender of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 notes in circulation was less than the figure received after demonetisation. Roy sought an inquiry into criminal conspiracy, criminal breach of trust, and cheating.

The division bench emphasized that RBI’s annual reports, publicly available and compiled by experts, should not be questioned as irregular or illegal without demonstrating any criminality. While acknowledging that the petitioner had gathered information from these reports and RTI disclosures, the court concluded that this data did not indicate criminal wrongdoing warranting a detailed inquiry or investigation.

Although the court considered imposing exemplary costs on the petitioner, it refrained from doing so upon the request of the petitioner’s advocate.