A viral incident from Odisha, where a man was seen carrying skeletal remains to a bank, sparked outrage and confusion over how banks deal with such situations.
But as more details emerged, the case has turned into an example of how banking rules work after the death of an account holder, and what happens when proper documents are missing.
The incident gained attention after social media posts claimed that a man was as proof of death in order to withdraw money.
However, Indian Overseas Bank, which is linked to Odisha Grameen Bank, later clarified that such claims were incorrect. The bank said the issue was related to a lack of required documentation and awareness of the process.
According to the bank, the claim was settled after the authorities issued a death certificate and legal heir certificate. The amount of Rs 19,402 was distributed among three legal heirs as per norms.
The woman had passed away earlier, and her brother approached the bank to withdraw money without submitting any death certificate or succession documents.
The nominee in the account had also passed away, leaving no valid claimant on record. Without proper documentation, the bank could not process the request.
In an attempt to prove the death, the man brought skeletal remains, a step that is neither legally valid nor required under banking rules.
Following the viral incident, authorities stepped in, issued the necessary documents, and the claim was processed.
Once an account holder dies, the account is no longer treated as a normal account. Any access to funds becomes a claim settlement process, not a simple withdrawal.
Banks require:
Without these, banks are not allowed to release funds, even if the claim appears genuine.
Legal expert Adhiraj Harish explained that one way to avoid such complications is to open a joint account under the “either or survivor” mode.
“What this means is both persons can operate the account, and if one passes away, the account does not get blocked. The survivor can continue to operate it,” he said.
However, he disagreed with the view that nomination is not useful.
“A nomination is very useful. In some situations, a person may not want to add another name to the account or allow someone else to operate it,” he said.
He added that while a joint account may have helped in this specific case — especially since the claimant lacked documentation — nomination remains an important tool in most situations.
The Odisha incident highlights a larger issue — lack of awareness about banking procedures, especially in rural areas.
Banks follow strict rules to prevent fraud and ensure money goes to the rightful beneficiaries. But when documents are missing or processes are not understood, even genuine claims can get delayed.
The case serves as a reminder that:
What began as a shocking viral story has ultimately underlined a simple reality — understanding basic banking rules can prevent unnecessary hardship.