A fresh dispute has emerged between former HDFC Bank Chairman Atanu Chakraborty and the lender, following a three-month independent investigation into his abrupt resignation. Chakraborty has vehemently rejected the bank's claims that he failed to cooperate with an external legal review, asserting that the entire probe constituted a “roving inquiry” and an “exercise in futility.”
Chakraborty, a former bureaucrat, strongly contested HDFC Bank’s narrative regarding his alleged non-participation in the investigation. He stated that he had repeatedly requested the bank to provide the specific terms of reference and the relevant legal framework under which the outside lawyers were operating. “I had repeatedly asked, after they approached me for a discussion on this, that they share the terms of reference for these two or three lawyers, including one from a territory outside India,” Chakraborty told The Economic Times.
He further clarified the fundamental reason behind his sudden departure, emphasizing that it was never intended to trigger an external corporate investigation. “My resignation was also a call of conscience,” Chakraborty stated, adding that he considers himself disconnected from the bank. He accused the bank of being “economical with the truth” by claiming he did not cooperate or provide information, calling it “unfair and not gentlemanly.”
HDFC Bank's Investigation Findings
The friction dates back to March 18, 2026, when Chakraborty abruptly stepped down, citing that “certain happenings and practices” within the country’s second-largest lender over the previous two years were “not in congruence” with his personal values and ethics. In response, HDFC Bank’s board commissioned US-based Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati and India’s Wadia Ghandy & Co to investigate the claims.
The law firms recently concluded their review, stating in a stock exchange filing that Chakraborty’s assertions were “not substantiated” by documentary evidence. They also noted that he did not participate in the probe despite repeated requests.
The Dubai Branch Controversy
The independent review also touched upon a contentious matter involving HDFC Bank’s Dubai branch, where allegations of mis-selling Credit Suisse AT-1 bonds had surfaced. The law firms reported finding no evidence that Chakraborty had raised ethics or values-related concerns regarding this issue during his tenure.
Addressing this, Chakraborty stated that the Dubai matter had already been dealt with internally through appropriate administrative channels. “The bank has claimed that during the Dubai inquiry, I did not say anything. That inquiry led to the expulsion of very senior people plus a disciplinary action,” Chakraborty explained. He added that if the mitigation measures and punishments were deemed satisfactory by the board, then the matter was considered closed. He found the bank's revisiting of this issue “superfluous.”
With the legal review concluded, market analysts suggest that HDFC Bank’s immediate focus will now shift towards key regulatory and leadership milestones, including the appointment of a permanent part-time chairman and the potential re-appointment of Managing Director and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan later this year.