CBI Files FIRs Against Former Bank Officials for Opening Mule Accounts in Cyber Crime Case

The CBI has launched an investigation into former officials of Punjab and Sind Bank in Sri Ganganagar for allegedly opening mule accounts tied to over ₹1,621 crores in illicit transactions linked to cyber crime. The agency's findings reveal that these accounts were opened under the names of non-existent companies using fraudulent documents. This case highlights the ongoing battle against financial fraud and cyber crime in India, raising concerns about banking practices and regulatory oversight. Read on to discover the details of this significant investigation and its implications.

By Narendra Chaudhary Jan 17, 2026, 08:53 IST

CBI Takes Action Against Bank Officials in Cyber Crime Investigation

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has initiated separate FIRs against former branch heads of Punjab and Sind Bank in Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan, for allegedly opening 'mule' accounts linked to transactions exceeding ₹1,621 crores, derived from cyber crimes and other illegal activities. This information was disclosed by officials on Friday.

The agency's actions stem from an initial investigation that uncovered 13 accounts at the bank's Government Girls Higher Secondary School branch and four at the main branch in Sri Ganganagar, which facilitated the movement of illicit funds amounting to ₹1,621 crores obtained through cyber fraud and other scams.

The CBI has registered cases against Aman Anand, the former chief manager of the main branch, and Vikas Wadhwa, the head of the Government Girls Higher Secondary School branch. Additionally, several other entities, including companies and individuals that assisted in opening these accounts, have also been implicated.

Mule accounts are bank accounts utilized by criminals, either with or without the account holder's knowledge, to receive, transfer, or legitimize illicit funds.

The FIR alleges that bank officials prepared false reports after conducting fake site visits to facilitate the opening of these accounts under the names of fictitious companies, thereby providing a false verification of business activities.

The central investigative agency noted that all 17 companies under whose names these accounts were opened did not actually exist. These companies were created solely with forged and fraudulent documents to facilitate the opening of accounts and transactions.