HDFC Bank Limited on 27 June 2026 announced the conclusion of an independent legal review commissioned earlier this year, stating that the review found no evidence to support the concerns raised by former part-time chairman and independent director Atanu Chakraborty in his resignation letter.
The review was carried out by two external law firms — international firm Wilson Sonsini Goodrich and Rosati, Personal Corporation (PC) and Indian firm Wadia Ghandy and Co — over a period of three months. Bank had formally informed the stock exchanges on 24 March 2026 that it was initiating this review to examine three specific questions: whether any concern raised by Mr Chakraborty in his resignation statement was evident in the Bank's records; whether he had formally recorded any dissent during his tenure; and whether such dissent, if any, had been addressed by the board.
During the course of the review, the two law firms examined thousands of documents, including board and committee meeting minutes, agenda papers, internal communications, and other relevant materials covering the two years preceding Mr Chakraborty's resignation. The firms also conducted interviews with all independent directors, including committee chairpersons, the bank's managing director and chief executive officer (CEO), and senior management personnel responsible for control and assurance functions.
Both, the Bank and the external law firms, made repeated requests for Mr Chakraborty to participate in the review process and be interviewed, but the interview ultimately did not take place.
Upon completing their examination, the law firms concluded that Mr Chakraborty's resignation statement and its implications were not substantiated by either documentary evidence or witness testimony. The review established that board and committee meeting minutes were prepared through a comprehensive drafting, review, and approval process — one that provided Mr Chakraborty with adequate opportunities to formally record any objections or concerns he may have held. However, the investigators found no contemporaneous evidence in board records, committee materials, or related communications to support the concerns he later cited in his resignation.
Witness interviews conducted as part of the review similarly did not corroborate the allegations contained in the statement.
The review also specifically addressed references Mr Chakraborty made in post-resignation public remarks to what he described as the 'Dubai matter'. The law firms found no contemporaneous evidence indicating that he had raised concerns related to his personal values and ethics, or that he had expressed disagreement with decisions taken by the board or relevant Board Committees on that matter or any other issue during his tenure.
Summarising their findings, the law firms stated: "The contemporaneous evidence reviewed was inconsistent with Mr Chakraborty's Statement, and External Law Firms' review did not identify any basis for the Statement." The report was subsequently submitted to HDFC Bank's board of directors.
By way of background, Mr Chakraborty, a former finance secretary to the government of India, had abruptly resigned as part-time chairman of HDFC Bank in March 2026, prior to the completion of his term. In his resignation letter, he wrote that certain happenings and practices within the bank that he had observed over the preceding two years were not in congruence with his personal values and ethics, and that this was the sole basis for his decision. He clarified that there were no other material reasons for the resignation beyond what he had stated.
The conclusion of the legal review effectively closes the formal inquiry into his allegations, with the bank maintaining that neither the documentary record nor the testimony of witnesses supported the claims made in his resignation statement.
Planning to Open a Bank Account Online? Here’s What You Should Check Before Applying
Sponsored Post
01 June 2026
A savings bank account is traditionally a deposit account where customers can park money and earn interest. Modern-day savings accounts offer much more. Apart from conventional banking, they now support online transactions, UPI...
There could be reasonable apprehension regarding the impartiality of law firms appointed and remunerated by the bank’s management.
“The conflict of interest is inherent in such an arrangement.
Secondly, minutes of the board meeting is not the only repository of evidence of any wrongdoings that may have occurred.
Thirdly, the objective of the inquiry should not be to prove Atanu Chakraborty wrong or to prove that he did not explicitly speak out his apprehensions in board meetings.
In the interest of maintaining financial market integrity and reinforcing faith of the common man in the banking industry, RBI should intervene and conduct it’s own investigation/audit