
An appraiser who was working with a bank has absconded with 2.17 kg of gold ornaments worth 1.44 crore rupees. These ornaments were mortgaged by customers. The incident came to light during a routine audit of the bank’s branch in Rajupet, located in the Mangapet mandal of Mulugu district earlier this week.
The accused has been identified as Sammeta Prashanth, a resident of Palaigudem in the mandal and originally from Narsampet in Warangal district. Sub-inspector Ravi Kumar is leading the investigation into the case.
During the audit, bank officials discovered a discrepancy between the amount of gold recorded and the amount stored in the vaults. They promptly informed branch manager Kiran Kumar, who tried to contact appraiser Prashanth. However, they soon discovered that Prashanth and his family had left the village without informing anyone. The bank officials then filed a complaint with the police.
Upon further investigation, the police found that Prashanth had opened a gold shop in Rajupet and had also borrowed money from individuals in neighboring villages. In response, the police have formed special teams to search for and arrest Prashanth.
To address concerns of the customers who had mortgaged their jewelry, regional deputy general manager Srinivas Rao of the bank visited the Rajupet branch. He assured them that they need not worry, as the bank will either return an equal amount of gold or provide the equivalent value in money based on the market rate, as per the customers’ preference.
There is definitely collusion of officials or gross negligence , since jewels pledged to bank are kept under dual custody. Access by Appraiser to jewel safe is definitely violation of rules. More heads will roll.
In fact both set of keys (in dual custody) will be with the bank officials only . Immediately after the jewels r weighed nd apprised, it’s done again in the presence of the BM or whosoever incharge of pledged jewels nd the same is kept in a separate vault by the joint custodians (bank officials). Hence, the story that the appraiser ran off with the jewels is just unacceptable. As mentioned in an earlier comment, the bank officials cannot escape liability.
In one case in the late 90s, when the pledged jewels were found fake during the bank’s internal inspection, the appraiser argued that the jewels were original on the day of sanction of the loan nd the jewels were kept inside the vault by the joint custodians. He also argued that one of the official had verified the genuineness of the jewels. He further went on to say that, only the officials have the keys to the vault nd they might hv substituted it with fake jewels.
Why name of the bank is not mentioned ?
Comments already made by some are correct