Nearly two weeks after stepping down, Atanu Chakraborty, former chairman of HDFC Bank, cited concerns over “values” and “ethics” as the reason behind his unexpected resignation, choosing not to elaborate on specific incidents.
Recently, HDFC Bank engaged two domestic international law firms to examine the resignation letter submitted by former part-time chairman Atanu Chakraborty.
In an interview with CNBC-TV18, Chakraborty discussed subjects such as the AT-1 bond issue, internal governance, and the market’s response to his departure.
Chakraborty singled out the AT-1 bond episode as a notable concern.
HDFC Bank has dismissed three senior executives this month after an internal probe into allegations of mis-selling Credit Suisse’s AT-1 bonds to non-resident Indian clients via its Dubai and Bahrain branches. The decision was disclosed in an exchange filing dated March 23.
This action follows restrictions placed on the bank’s Dubai branch by the Dubai Financial Services Authority, which has barred the branch from onboarding new clients or launching new financial services from 26 September 2025, reported Reuters.
He referred to conduct and customer onboarding problems at the Dubai branch dating back to 2018 and questioned the bank’s description of it as a “technical lapse”.
Drawing attention to the delayed reaction, he commented: “Something goes on for eight years and suddenly we take an action… I feel these conduct issues should not arise in the first place.”
He described this approach as reactive rather than preventive.
He clarified that he was not making personal accusations, stating that any differences were due to ethical standards: “I never said anyone was right or wrong… people need to read the dictionary.”
When asked about reports suggesting opposition to Sashidhar Jagdishan’s reappointment as CEO, Chakraborty responded that such discussions had not taken place: “Something which was not even discussed – how could differences be there?”
On speculation regarding the HDB–MUFG deal, Chakraborty explained that the chairperson does not make independent decisions:
“No paper comes to the chairperson… he or she does not take any independent decisions.”
He added that any support or objection would only be relevant if formally presented in board meetings.
Chakraborty acknowledged having informal conversations with the Reserve Bank of India but did not provide details.
He described the bank as “well capitalised and sound” while noting that “sound institutions must become even more sound.”
He linked matters like low CASA ratios, high cost-to-income ratios, and share underperformance to his role’s responsibilities, rejecting claims that these developments were solely attributable to the merger.
Regarding the drop in share price after his resignation, Chakraborty pointed to broader market factors: “The share price… had been falling for various reasons even before that,” mentioning geopolitical tensions and overall market sell-off, with his exit “adding a little bit.”
On governance reviews by law firms, he remarked that external reviews have limitations: “Lawyers can only tick compliance boxes… the board must do its own introspection.”
Chakraborty said he stands by his resignation letter and decision, describing both as personal and principled. He concluded his remarks by stressing that his decision was an internal matter and urging ongoing reflection within the board on governance. All other issues, he said, were secondary.
