hdfc threatining calls to file criminal case

Hi Sir,

I have taken HDFC and ICICI credit cards in 2006-07, mainted with clear track till 2009, without any delay or due in my pay ments, My financials hit in 2009 and used the cards , not paid from then. even now i don't have money to clear the dues.  The agents chased me at that time , to avoid that harassment changed my address and phone numbers, again they contacted me in 2014 and started harassing, then i have taken advise from an advocate and filed a Writ petition in high court of Ap to restraining them from harassement and ask banks to collect legally(time barred ), also sent the notices to the banks registered address. No one from bank side contested the case, The case never came to any bench.I gave the WP case details to the collection people, they kept quiet for some time. From last one week  getting 10-15 threatening calls from HDFC , even though i shared the my Court case details, they are telling that they wwill file criminal cases.

All my credit card dues are time barred (nearly 9 years), my last payment was in 2009, no document sign, no cheque issued in this nine years. Pls share your views, whether the banks can file criminal case after all these years. also advise how to stop these calls.

i appreciate your response


Raj Kumar

Lawyer in Hyderabad.wats app no.9989324294

Most banks will leave legal action to the last resort. First, the credit card company will contact the cardholder and ask him/her to make payments and also give the defaulter a reasonable amount of time to atleast make a minimum payment. As a last step towards recovery of dues, credit card companies will file a civil case. Generally, criminal cases cannot be filed for civil disputes.

As a general norm, it is better not to miss credit card bill payments as it will significantly affect the credit score of the individual. Banks tend to give customers a 60 day to 90 day grace period to make payments. During this period a penalty interest rate will be charged for late payment of bill.

Even if the credit card bill is paid a day later than the actual due date, a certain amount of fee is charged for late payment in the form of interest. This interest rate varies from bank to bank and ranges anywhere from 6% to 20%.

It is possible to negotiate with the credit card company or bank in case of a default. In some cases, the EMI towards the outstanding amount can be reduced by increasing the tenure and the interest rate.



If one has borrowed one should pay.

The lender may claim that borrower evaded contact by not updating contact details..

M/s HDFC Bank and you both are at liberty to pursue any legal route..

Record all calls and point out the harassment and threats in the said calls..

You have the option to write to MD/CEO   Aditya Puri of M/s HDFC banbk ltd





Approach your own very able senior LOCAL counsel of unshakable repute and integrity specializing in consumer/civil matters and having successful track record ….. and worth his/her salt …and discuss in person and even with seasoned PIP to draft as per facts of the matter and proceed in best of your interest.. ….and counter other side…….



Rest go thru;

Standard Chartered Bank vs Yogesh Sharma, Associate





and pick up relevant points..

It is your personal prerogative to approach RBI..

Best recourse is thru  a very able counsel as already suggested..


Thanks Kumar Doab sir and Rama chary garu.. Is there any chance of filing criminal cases by banks on time barred credit card delinquent people.. Will the limitation act safeguard me in this scenario.. Thanks

Thanks Kumar Doab sir and Rama chary garu.. Is there any chance of filing criminal cases by banks on time barred credit card delinquent people.. Will the limitation act safeguard me in this scenario.. Thanks

Limitation period;3 years in relation to a suit …..recovery from the date on which the right to recover accrues.

Central Government Act

The Limitation Act, 1963


The intent to cheat or cheating may be lender’s outlook..

It may or may not survive test of law..

You may pick up relevant points and all that is shared so far should suffice for online discussions.


GO thru for cue ;


Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Dr. Dipankar Chakraborty vs Allahabad Bank & Ors on 7 July, 2017

The petitioner has assailed the invocation of the provisions of

Securitization    and    Reconstruction    of   Financial   Assets   and

Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) by the

bank on the ground that at the time of invocation, the same was

barred by the laws of limitation.


A proceeding under Section 19 of the RDB Act of 1993 may result in a certificate in favour of the bank. Such a certificate can be put into execution by invoking the provisions of the Act of 2002. This does not lead to an anomalous situation as the bank has contended. The laws of limitation do not take away a subsisting right, it merely postpones the enforcement of an existing right to be revived for enforcement upon happening of a future event. The bank on receiving a certificate under Section 19 of RDB Act, 1993, has its right to proceed under the Act of 2002 revived. It then needs to proceed under the Act of 2002, within the period of limitation, from the date of such certificate.

The issues raised are, therefore, answered by holding that, the initiation of the proceedings by the bank was barred by the laws of limitation on July 5, 2011 and all proceedings taken by the bank consequent upon and pursuant to the notice under Section 13(2) of the Act of 2002 dated July 5, 2011 are quashed including such notice.



Allahabad High Court

Surya Pratap Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 May, 2015

Bench: Shashi Kant


63. In the circumstances, this Court is of further view that by filing of criminal complaint a dispute of purely civil nature is given a cloak of criminality with intention to pressurize the applicant and his wife to bring them to his own terms and to enforce obligations arising out of breach of contract touching commercial transactions instead of approaching Civil Court with a view to realize money at the earliest, as such by allowing continuance of complaint and consequential proceedings relating to it would amount to abuse of process of court and to prevent the same it is just and expedient in the interest of justice to quash the same by exercising inherent power of this Court under Section 482Cr.P.C.

64. For the facts and reasons stated above, this application deserves to be allowed.



Supreme Court of India

Alpic Finance Ltd vs P. Sadasivan And Anr 

It is trite law and common sense that an honest man entering into a contract is deemed to represent that he has the present intention of carrying it out but if, having accepted the pecuniary advantage involved in the transaction, he fails to pay his debt, he does not necessarily evade the debt by deception. 






There are many threads on similar query that you can search in SEARCH option e.g;


Further you may approach your own very able counsel ASAP in person.





Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


  Search Forum



IPC Grand Course     |    x