When a family member dies, especially the bread winner, the grief is often followed by a long list of practical tasks, such as , bank deposits, shares, mutual funds, jewellery and other assets to the rightful heirs. But for many families, completing that process can come with another, less expected cost: bribes.
A survey by LocalCircles found that 58% of families who transferred the assets of a deceased family member said they had to pay bribes to complete the process. The problem was not limited to a single point of contact either. While 29% said they had to pay bribes in one or two places, another 29% said they had to pay in “lots of places”.
The findings come even as governments and regulators have been pushing digitisation of property, financial and other records in an effort to make such processes easier and more transparent.
The LocalCircles survey received more than 32,000 responses from citizens across 349 districts. Of the 11,319 respondents who answered the question on the experience of transferring assets after a family member’s death, only 32% said the process was easy.
The remaining families reported difficulties at different stages.
About 11% said the process was straightforward because there was a registered will. Another 21% said they did not have a registered will but were still able to complete the transfer process.
However, 16% said that despite having a registered will, they had not been able to complete the transfer. Another 21% had no registered will and found the process very difficult, while 16% did not have a registered will and had not been able to complete the process.
A further 10% said they had not yet initiated the transfer process but needed to do so.
This suggests that having a will, while potentially making succession clearer, does not necessarily make the administrative process of transferring assets straightforward.
One of the most striking findings is that the incidence of reported bribery has increased rather than declined over the past four years.
LocalCircles said 52% of families reported having to pay bribes in its 2022 survey on the transfer of properties and assets after the death of a family member. That figure has now risen to 58% in the latest survey.
Among the 10,935 respondents who answered the bribery question, 24% said they did not have to pay a bribe, while 13% had not yet initiated the transfer process. Another 5% chose not to give a clear response.
The survey therefore points to a continuing problem despite the digitisation of several government processes.
For families who said they had to pay bribes, property registration and land transfer offices emerged as the biggest problem area.
73% of respondents who reported paying a bribe said they had to pay at a property registration or land transfer office.
The survey of 10,806 respondents found that 18% said they paid a bribe only at a property registration or local land office. Another 33% said they paid at both property registration/land offices and other local or state government offices.
Meanwhile, 22% said they had to pay at all three categories of offices covered in the survey — property registration/local land offices, magistrate offices/courts and other local or state government offices.
The findings underline why property transfers can become particularly difficult for families dealing with inheritance after a death.
The report points to the continued dependence on physical processes as one reason why the transfer of property can remain cumbersome.
It notes that under the existing Registration Act, 1908, the registration process continues to involve physical presence, physical documents, fingerprints, photographs and physical registration certificates in many cases.
The government had proposed replacing this framework with a more modern system through the Draft Registration Bill, 2025. The proposed framework includes electronic submission of documents, electronic appearance of parties and witnesses, electronic verification and digital registration certificates.
However, more than a year after the draft was placed in the public domain, the Bill has not been enacted, according to the report.
Some states have meanwhile moved ahead with their own reforms. The report cites Maharashtra’s e-registration facility and Delhi’s proposed overhaul of sub-registrar offices, including online appointments, document pre-verification and application tracking.
But these initiatives remain state-specific.
The issue is not restricted to property.
The survey covered the transfer of property, mutual funds and shares, brokerage accounts, bank accounts, jewellery and other assets after the death of a family member.
Regulators have introduced measures aimed at making financial asset transfers easier. For instance, the report notes that a SEBI framework effective from March 1, 2025 allows up to 10 nominees for demat accounts and mutual fund folios and facilitates transmission of holdings using a self-attested death certificate and updated KYC.
Similarly, nomination provisions under the Banking Laws (Amendment) Act, 2025, which came into force on November 1, 2025, allow a bank depositor to name up to four nominees.
But nomination does not necessarily determine who ultimately inherits an asset. The report points to the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling that succession law continues to govern entitlement to shares and securities even where a deceased shareholder had appointed a nominee.
The difficulties involved in transferring assets after a death can also contribute to money and investments remaining unclaimed.
The report cites data from the government’s “Aapki Poonji, Aapka Adhikar” campaign, under which regulators and agencies held camps across 748 districts between October and December 2025 to help people trace forgotten financial assets.
At the time, approximately Rs 78,000 crore was lying unclaimed with banks, Rs 14,000 crore with insurers, Rs 9,000 crore in unpaid dividends and Rs 3,000 crore with mutual funds, according to the report.
By February 28, 2026, Rs 5,777 crore had been returned through 22.95 lakh claims.
The report also says the RBI’s Depositor Education and Awareness Fund held Rs 60,518 crore as of January 31, 2026.
Not all of these amounts are necessarily linked to inheritance, but the report notes that a significant part of unclaimed money can involve families that either do not know about assets held by a deceased member or find the transfer process difficult.
The LocalCircles report argues that simply digitising individual processes may not be enough. It calls for a system in which the entire transfer process can be completed online and tracked from beginning to end, reducing the need for citizens to repeatedly appear before officials.
It also calls for the Draft Registration Bill, 2025 to be finalised and enacted, along with a firm timeline for states to move towards end-to-end online registration.
For families, the larger problem is that inheritance is not just about determining who owns what. It is also about actually getting those assets transferred — a process that can involve multiple offices, documents, legal procedures and, according to the survey, in many cases, bribes.
And despite years of digitisation efforts, the survey’s most telling finding is that the share of families reporting bribery has gone from 52% in 2022 to 58% in 2026.