Data Entry Operator Arrested in Rs 169 Crore HSPCB Fraud
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has arrested Saurav Sharma, a data entry operator at the Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPCB), for his role in a Rs 169.36 crore fraud. Sharma conspired with accused bank officials and 'facilitated and assisted in processing investments in favour of private banks' in violation of rules, according to the CBI. He was produced before a Panchkula court on June 23, which sent him to four-day CBI custody.
Part of Larger Rs 657 Crore Scam
The HSPCB fraud is part of a larger Rs 657 crore bank scam involving officials from IDFC First Bank and AU Small Finance Bank colluding with Haryana government officials, including IAS officers. The scam siphoned funds from eight Haryana government departments and two Chandigarh Administration departments. The Enforcement Directorate (ED), also investigating, estimates the fraud at Rs 645 crore.
Violation of Investment Limits
Sharma was aware of the investment limits and instructions issued by the Finance Department regarding placement of public funds, yet he 'facilitated and assisted' in processing investments in favour of private banks in contravention of such instructions. He allegedly enabled a deposit exceeding Rs 50 crore at IDFC First Bank on March 18, 2025, resulting in parking of Rs 67.9 crore. He then processed an additional Rs 37.78 crore investment, bringing the total to Rs 105.68 crore, despite the limit of Rs 50 crore. Further, on October 1, 2025, he processed another Rs 8 crore investment, taking the total to Rs 113.68 crore.
Fraudulent Transactions and Siphoning
From March 13, 2025, to February 13, 2026, fraudulent debit transactions siphoned Rs 187.26 crore to various entities, including shell entities. Credit transactions of Rs 17.90 crore were recorded, resulting in a net loss of Rs 169.36 crore. After investments were made in IDFC First Bank, funds were siphoned to shell companies.
Unauthorised Communication and Pecuniary Benefits
CBI evidence shows Sharma maintained 'regular and unauthorised' communication with representatives of private banks who are co-accused, sharing confidential information about investment proposals, maturity of funds, rates quoted by other banks, and movement of official files. He obtained pecuniary benefits from co-accused in lieu of favours extended regarding investments. Upon seizure of his mobile phone, original communications were missing or deleted, and he failed to provide explanation or assistance in retrieval. The CBI stated, 'His custodial interrogation is necessary to ascertain and recover such deleted communications and the data, passwords and devices connected therewith.'
