Rs 145cr FD fraud: Absconding bank's deputy VP surrenders

Panchkula : More than a fortnight after the alleged Rs 145-crore fixed deposit fraud involving the Panchkula municipal corporation came to light, the second prime accused — Pushpender Chaudhary , deputy vice-president of Kotak Mahindra Bank 's Sector 11 branch — surrendered before the Special Investigation Team (SIT) on Wednesday.

With Chaudhary's surrender, the number of suspects arrested or surrendered in the case has gone up to six.

Earlier, the Haryana Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) had arrested Dileep Kumar Raghav, relationship manager at Kotak Mahindra Bank; Rajat Dahra; Kapil Kumar; and Vikas Kaushik, the MC's former senior accounts officer. Another suspect, Swati Tomar, surrendered before the State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) on April 6.

The ACB informed the Panchkula court that it will now conduct a "detailed and confrontational interrogation" of Kaushik and Chaudhary by seating them face to face to "bring the truth on record, as both are allegedly blaming each other for preparing forged documents and seals."

"Their specific roles, along with the involvement of other accused persons, are yet to be fully ascertained. Both accused are alleged to have conspired and embezzled government funds," the ACB told the court.

Meanwhile, the court extended Kaushik's ACB remand by two more days. The agency said further arrests are likely as the investigation is still underway. Chaudhary will be produced before the court on Thursday.

During the probe, Kaushik was earlier taken on a five-day remand, which concluded on Wednesday.

Officials said he will continue to be questioned and more disclosures are expected in the coming days.

The case pertains to serious irregularities detected in records of 16 fixed deposits held by the municipal corporation, Panchkula, with Kotak Mahindra Bank. The deposits amounted to over Rs 145 crore, with a maturity value of nearly Rs 158 crore.

Of these, 11 fixed deposits worth Rs 59.57 crore matured in Feb 2026. However, bank statements furnished by the branch reportedly did not tally with one another or with official municipal records.

The bank is also said to have informed officials that no active term deposits existed, deepening suspicion. During verification, officials further discovered additional bank accounts that were not reflected in the corporation's official records.