EXPECTED DA FOR BANK EMPLOYEE FROM MAY 2026

Expected DA Calculation Updated on 30.03.26 on the basis of CPI for the month of Feb'26 with the assumptions of Mar'26. The CPI for the month of Feb'26 announced on 30.03.26 as 148.5 with a decrease of 0.10 points from Jan'26. (as per revised base year 2016) (The base year was changed from Oct 2020)

1. Keeping in view of recent CPI announced , we may assume there would be an increase in CPI index by 0.90 points in the next month. Accordingly, on this assumption, we may expect there would be an increase of 0.80% DA in terms of 12^th BPS on revised pay. Total 25.8% DA will become payable from May'26.
2. On assumptions if there is an increase in CPI index by 0.60 points in the next month, we may expect there would be be an increase of 0.70% DA in terms of 12^th BPS on revised pay. Total 25.70 percentage of DA will become payable from May'26.
3. On assumptions if there is an increase in CPI index by 0.50 points in the next both month, we may expect there would be be an increase of 0.67% DA in terms of 12^th BPS on revised pay. Total 25.67 percentage of DA will become payable from May'26.

CBI Arrests SBI Assistant Manager in Rs.16,000 Bribery Case in Assam

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has arrested an Assistant Manager of State Bank of India (SBI) in a bribery case in Assam. The bank officer was caught while allegedly demanding and accepting a bribe of ₹16,000 from a complainant.

According to the CBI, the accused officer was working as an Assistant Manager and Loan Officer at SBI’s Gumi Branch in Kamrup (Rural) district of Assam

Bank employees can face arrest if they are involved in corruption, fraud, forgery, or misuse of their official position. Various laws in India allow investigative agencies to take action against such offences.

 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

Bank officials who demand or accept bribes, misuse their position, or obtain illegal benefits can be booked under the Prevention of Corruption Act. This law is commonly used in cases investigated by the CBI.

IPC Section 420 – Cheating

This section applies when a bank employee dishonestly cheats a customer, bank, or financial institution to gain money or benefits.

 IPC Section 409 – Criminal Breach of Trust

If a bank officer misuses or illegally transfers funds entrusted to them, they can be charged under this section for breach of trust.

 IPC Section 468 – Forgery for Cheating

This section is used when fake documents, forged signatures, or fabricated records are used to approve loans or financial transactions.

 IPC Section 471 – Using Forged Documents

If a bank staff member knowingly uses forged documents as genuine, they can face action under this section.

Case Registered After Complaint

The CBI registered the case on 12 March 2026 after receiving a complaint against the bank officer. The complainant alleged that the officer had demanded a bribe of ₹16,000 in return for processing loan applications.

These loan applications were related to customers seeking loans for the installation of rooftop solar electrification systems.

CBI Trap and Arrest

After verifying the complaint, the CBI set up a trap operation. During the operation, the accused officer was caught red-handed while demanding and accepting the bribe amount of ₹16,000 from the complainant

Delhi Court Convicts MP Congress MLA Rajendra Bharti in Bank Fraud and Forgery Case

A Delhi court on Wednesday convicted Madhya Pradesh Congress MLA Rajendra Bharti in a corruption case. The case involves forgery of bank records and cheating a cooperative bank through a fixed deposit scheme.

Rajendra Bharti is a three-time MLA from the Datia constituency in Madhya Pradesh. He is also a senior leader of the Indian National Congress. He was facing trial in this cheating case.

The court said that Bharti was part of a criminal conspiracy. This conspiracy allowed illegal withdrawal of interest from the bank for more than 10 years.

Justice Dig Vinay Singh, Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act at Rouse Avenue Courts, said that the evidence clearly shows Bharti’s role. The judge noted that Bharti was linked to both the beneficiary trust and the bank.

The court said that Bharti was a trustee of the beneficiary trust. At the same time, he was also the chairperson of the bank when the fraud happened. Because of this, the court concluded that he was part of the conspiracy.

The case was earlier being heard in Madhya Pradesh. Later, it was transferred to Delhi by the Supreme Court after Bharti requested it.

The case is related to a fixed deposit of ₹10 lakh made in 1998. The deposit was made in Zila Sahkari Krishi Gramin Vikas Bank in the name of a trust called Shri Shyam Sunder Shyam Jan Sahyog Evam Samajik Vikas Sansthan.

The prosecution said that the deposit was originally for three years. However, bank records were later changed to show that it was extended to 10 years and then to 15 years.