THE JHARKHAND STORY NETWORK
Daltonganj, May 2: A peculiar case of KYC-related complications has surfaced at the main Punjab National Bank (PNB) branch in Daltonganj, Palamu, where a long-time customer was denied access to his savings account due to a name mismatch involving the abbreviation “Md.”
The customer, who has held both a savings account and a term deposit since 1980, faced unexpected trouble when the bank put a hold on his account for not updating his Know Your Customer (KYC) details. When he approached the bank to resolve the issue, the staff firmly insisted on fresh xerox copies of his Aadhaar card, PAN card, and two passport-size photographs.
Minor Name Mismatch Leads to Major Banking Roadblock
The situation escalated when a minor but significant discrepancy was discovered between the documents. The customer’s PAN card mentioned his name as “Mohammad,” while his Aadhaar card recorded it as “Md.” Despite the widely accepted understanding that “Md” is a common abbreviation for “Mohammad,” the bank official was unconvinced.
Also Read- Sonia, Rahul Gandhi served court notice in National Herald case
While the official maintained a polite demeanor, he stood firm on protocol. He stated that unless the name was identical on both documents, the KYC could not be updated and the account would remain on hold. All attempts to clarify that “Md” is simply shorthand for “Mohammad” were unsuccessful.
The official insisted that the name should be uniform across both Aadhaar and PAN—either both showing “Md” or both “Mohammad”—to avoid any ambiguity. The episode left the customer frustrated, highlighting how even minor inconsistencies in documentation can lead to major disruptions in banking access.
Date of Birth Discrepancy Further Complicates Process
A major roadblock in the customer’s ordeal stemmed from the Aadhaar card displaying only the year of birth—such as 1952 or 1974—instead of the complete date, month, and year. While this is issue with many Aadhaar cards, the bank official insisted on the full date of birth for KYC verification.
Ironically, the same customer had a term deposit at the branch under the senior citizen category, which had been accepted without any such objection earlier. This led to an obvious question: if the bank already recognises the customer as a senior citizen for a fixed deposit, why is a full birth date now critical for allowing transactions in the savings account?
No Malice, Just Procedure
The bank official handling the case made it clear he had no intention of withholding the ₹2 lakh payment issued via cheque. However, he insisted on completing every small requirement of the KYC process before proceeding. It turned into a lengthy and exhausting process for both sides.
Despite having a substantial balance in his savings account, the customer was left feeling helpless and frustrated, as if his account held no value without KYC compliance.
Also Read- PM Modi inaugurates India’s 1st transhipment hub, ‘Vizhinjam seaport’, in Kerala
Chief Manager’s Intervention Saves the Day
Just when the customer had lost hope, Chief Manager Anand Kumar intervened. He patiently listened to the problem and assured the customer that he would personally look into the Aadhaar and PAN card discrepancies.
In a commendable display of professionalism and empathy, Anand Kumar collected the photocopies himself and guided the counter staff on how to proceed. He didn’t override any protocols, but his experienced handling helped resolve the issue smoothly.
By stepping out of his office and assisting at the counter, Anand Kumar ensured that a long-standing customer of over 45 years walked out satisfied. The customer’s cheque was cleared without further delay.
His efforts didn’t go unnoticed. Several customers remarked, “How many bank managers are willing to go the extra mile like Anand Kumar?”
A Broader Lesson for Banking Institutions
The incident brought to light the silent suffering many customers endure—especially women and elderly individuals who are less familiar with banking norms. It’s time for higher banking authorities to acknowledge this ‘silent agony’ and act to make procedures more customer-friendly.
No one opposes KYC compliance, but freezing access to one’s hard-earned savings due to minor documentation issues—without offering immediate alternatives—is excessive. Banks must consider establishing a “green corridor” for such situations, where genuine customers can be assisted even if they lack certain documents at the moment.
Banks must not operate under the assumption that every customer is a potential fraudster. Long-term customers deserve trust and dignity—not suspicion.
