Supreme Court intervention clears Uttarakhand man’s negative CIBIL score

The Supreme Court has rectified a man's erroneous negative credit score, which barred him from financial access despite no defaults.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has stepped in to resolve the grievance of a man whose credit score remained “negative” for years despite having no outstanding loan or default, prompting banks and Credit Information Bureau (India) Limited CIBIL to finally correct their records.

Rajendra Singh Panwar’s battle began with a writ petition filed five years ago before the Uttarakhand High Court, where he sought directions to correct his credit records and redress the anomalies that had crept into his CIBIL profile. (Representative)

This telling instance of how erroneous credit records can choke access to finance came up before a bench of justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan. The case arose from a petition filed by Rajendra Singh Panwar, a businessman and resident of Uttarakhand, who complained that an adverse CIBIL score had effectively locked him out of the financial system since 2020, even though he had no outstanding dues.

Panwar’s plea, argued through senior counsel PS Patwalia, complained that despite not having “any loan and no default,” his credit profile continued to reflect a negative score, preventing him from availing financial facilities.

The problem, he argued, was compounded by confusion over his PAN, which was shared by others with the same name, leading to apprehensions that others’ defaults were being attributed to him.

Taking note of the issue, the top court sought responses directly from major lenders, including the State Bank of India and Punjab National Bank, asking them to clarify whether Panwar had any outstanding loans or defaults.

What followed exposed the root of the problem. Punjab National Bank, in its affidavit, categorically told the court that it had not reported any loan account or default against Panwar and that its records reflected no adverse credit information whatsoever.

The State Bank of India, on its part, clarified in its affidavit that its reporting to CIBIL was limited strictly to facilities actually availed by the petitioner and linked to his updated PAN details.

With both banks effectively disowning any adverse reporting, the spotlight shifted to the credit information system itself. CIBIL, which had initially maintained that it merely collates data provided by banks, informed the court that the petitioner’s records had now been corrected in light of the clarifications.

Recording these developments, the bench noted that nothing further survived for adjudication and disposed of the matter, effectively closing the loop on a grievance that had lingered for years.

To be sure, Panwar’s battle began with a writ petition filed five years ago before the Uttarakhand High Court, where he sought directions to correct his credit records and redress the anomalies that had crept into his CIBIL profile. In February 2020, the high court directed CIBIL to decide on his representation within the stipulated time frame. When that direction did not translate into any meaningful correction on the ground, Panwar was forced to initiate contempt proceedings, alleging wilful disobedience of the court’s order.

However, in August 2025, the high court dismissed his contempt plea, leaving him without any substantive relief despite years of pursuing the matter.

It was this dismissal that ultimately propelled Panwar to the Supreme Court, where his petition, filed through advocate Manish Paliwal, challenged the high court’s 2025 order, prompting the top court to intervene. The proceedings in the apex court took place on March 20, while the order was released earlier this week.

For Panwar, the outcome brings long-awaited relief -- a clean credit record after years of being flagged as a defaulter without cause.