'Challenging Event': HDFC Bank CEO On Former Chairman’s Exit

HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan has described the sudden resignation of former chairman Atanu Chakraborty in March as a “challenging event” that led to questions about the bank’s corporate governance standards.

In the bank’s FY26 annual report, Jagdishan addressed the controversy surrounding Chakraborty’s departure and the allegations that followed.

Chakraborty resigned as chairman on March 17, citing “certain happenings and practices within the bank” that he said were not aligned with his personal values and ethics. However, he did not provide specific details in his resignation letter.

Later, during media interactions, Chakraborty indicated that his concerns were linked to the alleged mis-selling of Credit Suisse perpetual bonds by the bank.

Following his resignation, HDFC Bank appointed Keki Mistry as interim chairman after receiving approval from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

Jagdishan said the bank’s board acted quickly to communicate with analysts and the media, clarifying that Chakraborty had not raised any concerns during discussions with the board regarding practices that violated his ethical standards.

To address the concerns raised by the former chairman, the bank’s board initiated an independent legal review. Jagdishan said the review was conducted by external legal experts to ensure transparency and strengthen confidence in the bank’s governance framework.

Given HDFC Bank’s listing of American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) on the New York Stock Exchange, the board decided to involve both domestic and international legal advisers.

US-based law firm Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati and Indian law firm Wadia Ghandy & Co. were appointed to conduct the examination.

The board also formed a special committee comprising only independent directors to oversee the review process and ensure effective coordination between the bank and the external legal teams.

Jagdishan said the investigation involved a detailed examination of extensive internal records, including board meeting minutes, corporate communications and other relevant documents.

The legal teams interviewed all independent directors as well as several senior executives, including Jagdishan and leaders responsible for the bank’s control and assurance functions.

The review examined events and records covering the two years preceding Chakraborty’s resignation. According to Jagdishan, the external legal firms concluded that there was no evidence supporting the concerns expressed by the former chairman.

On June 26, HDFC Bank informed stock exchanges that the independent review found “no basis” for Chakraborty’s statement. The bank said the evidence reviewed during the process did not support the claims made in his resignation letter.

The bank also stated that both legal firms had repeatedly requested Chakraborty’s participation in the inquiry to understand his concerns directly. However, the former chairman ultimately did not participate in the review process.

Jagdishan said the bank’s response was aimed at reinforcing its commitment to strong governance practices, transparency and accountability amid heightened scrutiny following the leadership change.