Argha Basu vs. Employees Provident Fund Organization & Ors.

$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 24.03.2026
+ W.P.(C) 15055/2025
ARGHA BASU .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amit Pawan, Mr. Hassan Zubair
Waris, Ms. Shivangi Singh Rawat and
Ms. Aastha Shrestha, Advocates.
versus
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Kamal Kant Jha, Mr. Aishwarya
Deep Singh and Ms. Aakriti,
Advocates for EPFO.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

SACHIN DATTA, J. ( Oral )

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking that
Employees’ Provident Fund Organization (EPFO) be directed to release the
provident fund dues of the petitioner as also pension fund dues along with
the statutory interest, from 17.02.2017 till date of payment to the petitioner.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the entire accumulated provident
fund of the petitioner was fraudulently withdrawn from the EPFO way back
in April, 2017.
3. The petitioner initially approached this Court, by way of a writ
petition, being W.P.(C) 12256/2019, whereupon, directions were issued to
the EPFO vide order dated 20.11.2019 to consider the writ petition as a
representation.
4. Pursuant thereto, an order dated 19.12.2019 came to be passed by the
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 1 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54


EPFO, in which, it was, inter-alia, observed as under:-
“E. Taking a holistic view of the case of Mr. Argha Basu, I see that the
claim was settled correctly basing on the claim form duly authenticated
by the Authorized Representative of the Establishment. The dispute
raised subsequently is in the process of verification, The aggrieved
during this period has been continuously seeking redressal through
available forums including through a writ petition to the Hon'ble Delhi
High Court.

For any re-authorization to be done, there is a requirement of re-
crediting the amount to the member's EPF account which currently has
no balance. To do this, the available option with EPFO is through
recovery of the amount which allegedly has been paid to a wrong
account or through release of funds as a special case through Special
Reserve Fund (SRF) that requires sanction of the Head Office. This is
supposedly pending, because of non-conclusion of an investigation
prescribed for such purposes,
In the limited available time to the undersigned, communication was also
made to the Head Office to understand the progress made, if any, in this
regard. It is yet to be confirmed to this office, if the claim of Mr. Argha
Basu has been finally found as a case of fraudulent payment.
In the scenario above, I do not see any deliberate design to not give
desired justice to the aggrieved. Giving a benefit of doubt, I sympathize
with the picture presented by the aggrieved, but for the procedural
compulsions, the claim cannot be re-settled for want of a confirmation of
an actual fraud being committed in accordance with the procedures laid
down for the purpose, The current situation appears to be not going in
favour of Mr. Argha Basu for the time being as the claim was attested by
the Authorized Representative of the establishment which is the only
source for the department to identify an EPF member. The claim of Mr.
Argha Basu, as per the available information, was settled as per the
procedures laid.
In my considered view, I conclude that re authorization to Mr. Argha
Basu can be done, only after conclusion of the investigation that proves
that the claim settled by EPFO in his name is a fraudulent payment as
per the procedures in place to deal with such exceptional circumstances.

The representation is, accordingly, disposed-off.

Sd/- [Uttam Prakash] Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I,
EPFO Delhi West”
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 2 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54


5. Pursuant thereto, an FIR bearing FIR No. RC0032020A0030 dated
11.09.2020 came to be registered at the behest of the EPFO, wherein, it was
recorded as under:-
“12. First information contents:

The Employees' Provident Fund Organization (which functions
under the administrative control of Ministry of Labour & Employment,
Government of India) has been entrusted with the responsibility to
administer/ enforce the provisions of the Employees' Provident Fund &
Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 across the country. The organization
is also responsible for the maintenance of the PF accounts of its
members/subscribers and make settlement of the PF account when the
PF members applies for final settlement of his/her account.

The Financial Advisor S. Chief Account Officer of the EPFO vide
UO Note No. W5U/42(2)2017/ZFRMC(NZ) 22394 dated 29.12.2017
reported a case of fraudulent settlement of Provident Fund and Pension
Fund amounting to Rs.86 lakhs (approx.) from PF A/c No.
Dl/36793/4735 of Sh. Argha Basu, an ex-employee of M/s Bharti Airtel
Ltd at Regional Office, Delhi (North). The matter has also been
investigated by Addl. Central PF Commissioner (Delhi & Uttarakhand)
and Regional PF Commissioner-I, Regional Office, Delhi (North). Since
the Investigation reports were not convincing, the Vigilance Directorate
of EPFO took up the matter and conducted its own investigation. The
Investigation Report dated 5.2.2018 along with the relevant documents of
the case is enclosed herewith for ready reference.
From the Investigation conducted in the matter, prima facie, it is
established that the fraudulent settlement of provident Fund and Pension
Fund in respect of Sh. Argha Basu, PF A/c No- DL/36793/4735 has been
committed with possible/probable connivance of the officials/officers of
EPFO, the establishment M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd and Canara 8ank, Uttari
Pitampura Branch, Delhi. The following officials of EPFO have been
suspected to be involved against whom the permission u/s 17A of PC Act
has been provided by the competent authorities-
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 3 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54

The allegations mentioned in the complaint prima facie disclose
the commission of cognizable offence punishable U/s. 120-B r/w
420,467,468, 471 IPC and section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of PC Act, 1988 on
the part of Smt. Damyanti, Bara the then Accounts Officers, 5h. Vikas
Malik, Sh. Sunny Arora, Naveen Saroha, Anil Kumar Pal and Nitin
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 4 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54


Sharma, all SSAs of Regional Office, Delhi (North) EPFO, New Delhi,
unknown officials of M/s Bharti Airtel Limited and Unknown officials of
Canara Bank, Uttri Pritam Pura, New Delhi. Therefore, this Regular
Case is registered and entrusted to Sh. Ranjit Kumar, DSP CBI, ACB,
New Delhi for Investigation and requisite report thereof.”
6. Subsequent thereto, the matter was investigated by the CBI and a
charge-sheet came to be filed on 23.08.2024. The same concludes as under:-
“16.5 The said application was received in the Receipt Section of EPFO
(North), Wazirpur Office on 17.02.2017. After making necessary entries,
the application was sent to EDP Section, EPFO along with other
applications/withdrawal forms. However, the said application reportedly
got misplaced and was not processed further in the EDP Section of
EPFO Wazirpur Delhi. Investigation has revealed that as per practice in
vogue, there was no proper system of handing over/taking over of dak
between receipt Section and EDP section. There was no such record
prepared by either Receipt Section or EDP Section to establish which
dak were actually received by the Dealing Hand in EDP section from
Receipt Section, EPFO. It is revealed that Sh. Sunny Arora and Navin
Saroha had dealt with the applications received in EDP section from Dak
Section on 17.02.2017. However, for want of any handing over/taking
over details, it could not be established that application of Sh. Argha
Basu was received by them and they deliberately did not process the
same.
Investigation further revealed that 2nd withdrawal application in the
name of Sh Argha Basu mentioning same adhar number, pan card,
service particulars number as mentioned in the 1st application form was
received in the office of M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd. However, the residential
address, bank account number, was different from the 1st application
form. The said application including fictitious address, bank account
details etc. were filled-up by accused Sh Ram Singh in his own
handwritings. It is revealed that signatures of Sh. Argha Basu on the 2nd
application have been forged. Besides the bank details also pertains to
an account opened by some unknown person at Canara Bank, Uttri
Pitampura Branch, New Delhi, impersonating as Sh. Argha Basu. The
forged application with incorrect details, was filled up and processed by
accused Ram Singh when it was in his knowledge that the 1st application
duly filled-up by him, was not returned or any objection raised by EPFO.
Further, the correct details regarding address and bank details of Sh.
Argha Basu were available to him in the scanned record of copy of 1st
application of Sh Argha Basu. He, still deliberately filled-up false and
wrong details in the 2nd application form and did not cross check the
same with 1st application. Further, he processed the 2nd application
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 5 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54


when 1st application was still pending with EPFO.
16.7 It is further revealed that the forged 2nd application of Argha Basu
for withdrawal of PF amount, purportedly signed & stamped by Sh. K.P.
Sharma, Asitt. Manager (HR), Ms Bharti Airtel (authorized signatory),
was received in EPFO (North), Wazirpur on 06.04.2017. During
investigation, it is revealed that signatures of Sh. K. P. Sharma on the
said application have been forged.
16.8 Investigation further revealed that copy of Aadhar Card and PAN
Card having same numbers matching with original Argha Basu, but
having different residential address and bank details were enclosed with
forged application. The residential address was mentioned in this form as
Flat No.389, RU Block, Pitampura, New Delhi-110034 and bank account
as Canara Bank A/c No. 6379101000077 of Uttari Pitampura Branch,
New Delhi.
16.9 The said application was not entered in the Inward Register
maintained by Receipt/Dak Section, but bears stamp of 06.04.2017 as
Dak. The application was processed directly in EDP Section by Sh Anil
Kumar Pal, the then SSA EPFO (North). There was no occasion for Sh.
Anil Kumar to suspect the forged application as the 1st application of Sh.
Argha Basu was never processed by him. Further, he has no access to
online information, if any, regarding address, bank details etc. of Sh.
Argha Basu as alleged in the FIR.
16.10 Sh. Anil Kumar checked online the concerned section for final
settlement of the claim and forwarded the same to Accounts Section,
where it was dealt by Sh Nitin Sharma, the then SSA. He cross-checked
the details of the claimant in application form with Form-9 already
available with him and sent by M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd. The Form -9 did not
contain any bank details or address of the claimant and as such there
was no occasion for Sh. Nitin Sharma, SSA to cross-check these details,
which were actually forged to commit the fraud.
16.11 It is further revealed that after processing, Sh. Nitin Sharma
forwarded the application to Smt. Damyanti Bara, the then Accounts
Officer, who passed the claim in routine manner on the recommendations
of Sh. Nitin Kumar. It is revealed that the information regarding address
and bank details of the claimant were not available with EPFO including
Ms Damyanti Bara.
16.12 Investigation did not reveal anything incriminating against above
named EPFO officers regarding the allegation that they did not
deliberately process the original claim form dated 17.02.2017.Further
investigation also did not revealed that they have deliberately processed
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 6 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54


the purported forged Application dated 06.04.2017, which was enclosed
with the forged Adhar Card & PAN Card in the name of actual victim
Argha Basu, however, they acted in a gross negligent manner while
processing the bill in question.
16.13 Investigation revealed that on 10.04.2017, EPFO Office passed the
claim in favour of fake Argha Basu and amount was credited in the
Account No. 6379101000077 of Canara, Uttri Pitampura Branch Delhi.
It is revealed that the said account was opened by an unknown person on
15.03.2017, by using forged copies of Aadhar Card and PAN Card in the
name of Argha Basu having same genuine adhar number & pan number
of original Argha Basu but with different residential address and
managed to withdraw cash Rs 75 Lac (Approx) from Bank.
16.14 Investigation has revealed that the said bank account was allowed
by Sh. Ajay Kumar Meena, the then Branch Manager. It is further
revealed that it was a small branch opened recently and had no
biometrics facilities to cross check genuineness of Aadhar Card etc. to
verify KYC details. Further, photograph on photocopy of the Aadhar
card is blurred and not clearly identifiable. The image of the person, who
withdrew money from the bank, was captured in CCTV Camera placed in
the bank. which confirms that the person withdrew the amount was not
original Argha Basu. The identity of the person could not be established.
16.15 It further revealed that before allowing withdrawal of cash of Rs
75 laks, the branch Manager sought clarification from Regional Office,
Canara Bank as to whether withdrawal of such huge cash was permitted.
It was informed that as per prevalent RBI guidelines there was no
bar/limit on withdrawal of amount in cash by the account holder.
16.16 Investigation revealed that efforts were made to trace the person
who opened the said bank account impersonating as Sh. Argha Basu. The
Competent authority in CBI has approved reward of 50,000/- to be paid
to the person, who will provide any credible information about the
whereabouts of that person. Information about the fake Argha Basu has
also been published in one English & one Hindi news paper dated 16
July 2023. Further, data available online of National Crime Record
Bureau (NCRB) and State crime record Bureau (SCRB) was cross
checked through Face Recognition System (FCR). Customer Application
Form (CAF) and CDR of mobile phone mentioned in the fictitious bank
account were also verified. Local enquiries from addresses given in the
bank account, CAF etc. were also made. However, no useful information
about identity and current whereabouts of the person who impersonated
as sh. Argha Basu could be gathered.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 7 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54


16.17 During Investigation Layered voice Analysis (LVA) Test of 09
suspected officials/officers including FIR named and others persons
namely Sh Sunny Arora, Sh Naveen Saroha, Sh Anil Kumar Pal, Sh. Nitin
Sharma, Mr. Vikash Malik, Sh Krishan Pal Sharma, Sh Ram Singh, Sh
Bhagat Singh Dagar, Sh Ajay Kumar Meena the then Br Manager
Canara Bank, conducted at CFSL Lodhi Road. Based on LAV test,
polygraph test in respect of three suspects namely Sh Nitin Sharma, Sh
Bhagat Singh Dagar and Sh Ajay Kumar Meena was conducted, but
nothing deceptive/suspicious revealed against them. Accused Sh Ram
Singh did not give his consent for the Polygraph test.
16.18 Investigation revealed that accused Sh Ram Singh had attended
2nd claim form without verifying that why 2nd form was submitted when
1st claim form of Sh Argha Basu was processed by him. Investigation
revealed that 1st claim form of Argha Basu filled by accused Sh Ram
Singh and 2nd claim form was also filled by him. The address and bank
details of both claim form were different, he has not brought the said fact
to his senior officers about change of bank details, mobile and address of
the Argha Basu, which was submitted within a period of one and half
month.
16.19 Investigation revealed that mobile hand set used for mobiles phone
number mentioned in the 2nd application form and bank account details
in the name of Argha Basu, was purchased from Najafgarh area, which
is near to the residential address of accused Sh Ram Singh.
16.20 During Investigation, opinion of handwriting expert on questioned
writings/signatures of Ram Singh, Sh Krishan Pal and Sh Argha Basu on
both application forms, was taken. The expert confirmed handwritings of
accused Ram Singh on both the applications including the 2nd forged
application. It confirms that the said forged application was filled -up by
accused Ram Singh. As regard to signatures of Sh, Krishal Pal Singh, as
Authorized Signatory and Sh. Argha Basu, Claimant, on 2nd application
form, the Expert of CFSL in its first report opined that same belonged to
them.
However, during investigation Sh. Argha Basu claimed that as on
06.04.2017, when the application was received in EPFO, he was out of
country. Further, Sh. K.P. Singh had also denied his signatures on the on
2nd application form. Accordingly, to rule out any error in opinion of the
CFSL Expert, the questioned documents were sent again to CFSL for
second opinion. Additional admitted/specimen signatures of Sh. Argha
Basu and Sh. Krishan Pal Singh were also sent to CFSL.
This time, CFSL constituted a Board comprising of Handwriting Experts.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 8 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54


The Board reversed opinion of earlier expert and opined that authorship
of questioned signatures on 2nd application form, is not attributed to Sh
Argha Basu and Sh. Krishal Pal Singh and as such same have been
forged. However, CFSL confired the writing of Ram Singh in both the
application forms. It further corroborates 12 role of accused Ram Singh,
who filled-up and processed the forged 2nd application as well as the
original application.
16.21 The aforesaid facts & circumstances disclosed the commission of
offences punishable under sections u/s 420, 468 and 471 IPC on the part
of accused Ram Singh, the then Dealing Hand/Associate, M/s Bharti
Airtel LTd. The investigation did not reveal anything incriminating
against any of FIR named accused persons.
16.22 It is most respectfully prayed that accused Ram Singh may be
summoned and tried as per provision of law for the offence mentioned
above or for any other offences constituted by the facts and
circumstances discussed above.”
7. As such, the investigation appears to have established that the
petitioner was the victim of the fraud. It is noticed that in the counter-
affidavit filed on behalf of the EPFO, it has stated as under:-
“Further it is submitted that there is a SRF fund in EPFO which is used
for cases like the present. If the petitioner’s stands that his life savings
have been fraudulently withdrawn from EPFO then reauthorization of the
case can only be done subject to fulfilment of conditions after completion
of investigation where the conclusion regarding happening of fraudulent
activity on the part of the Departmental officials leading to non-receipt of
payment by the petitioner shall be identified. And as has been stated in the
preceding paragraphs the case is under investigation by Central Bureau
of Investigation (CBI) and no final conclusive report has been received
from the said agency.”

8. Considering that the perpetuation of fraud against the petitioner has
now been substantiated, the respondent/ EPFO is directed to take the course
as suggested in the order dated 19.12.2019 and also, as averred in the
counter-affidavit filed by them.
9. Consequently, the EPFO is directed to take steps to process the case
for the release of the provident fund dues to the petitioner by taking recourse
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 9 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54


to the SRF fund, which is admittedly to be used for cases like the present.
10. Let the requisite steps be taken by the respondent/ EPFO within a
period of 12 weeks from today.
11. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

SACHIN DATTA, J
MARCH 24, 2026/r

Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 15055/2025 Page 10 of 10

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:01.04.2026
18:39:54