When you look at a bank, what exactly comes to mind? Public money, Trust, Transparency, Investment, Savings? Yes, these are some of the words that immediately ring a bell. However, what if those managing banks, instead of practising accountability or transparency, take the general public for granted and use public money for their own interest or at the command of higher-ups? You will feel cheated, betrayed, and agitated.

This is precisely what has happened with Union Bank of India. The Bank spent ?7.25 crore to purchase two lakh copies of a single book: India@100, written by former Chief Economic Adviser to the Government of India Krishnamurthy V Subramanian. The books were purportedly purchased for distribution among its customers, libraries, and institutions.

In a country where banks are often understaffed, rural customers have to travel long distances to get access to basic banking services, and long queues are still the norm, especially during pension season, this massive spending on purchasing a book on the pretext of customer service is outrageous.

Not only this, the expense was not authorised by the board. In fact, this came into the limelight only when the agenda was placed before the board for its ratification. The executive director refused to ratify the expense. However, by then, the Bank had already made the payment to the book publishers, flouting all rules and regulations, with impunity.

Now, many would say it was just ?7.25 crore; it does not hold much importance. It was not a huge amount for a bank whose turnover runs into several lakh crores. The expense is not even a percentage of its total turnover. But then, the money could have been used to give microloans to hundreds of small entrepreneurs. No matter how small the amount may seem, it could have been a big financial support to such small businesses. It could have been used for public good, such as building sanitation blocks or libraries in rural regions. Or it could have been used in normal banking functions for routine expenses. In other words, this was certainly not the way money should have been spent.

Someone who enjoyed power and clout wanted to take advantage of getting orders for his books, and the Bank did nothing but simply obeyed and placed the order without following the standard operating procedures.

Unfortunately, this is not a one-off incident. Our banking history is full of such incidents where power and authority were misused, often with the silent consent of senior officials.

Remember the Punjab National Bank scam in 2018? It was not a software glitch or a lone wolf. It was a network of insiders helping Nirav Modi and Mehul Choksi secure fraudulent credit worth over ?13,000 crore, putting the interests of millions of customers at stake.

Or the way IDBI Bank gave loans to Kingfisher Airlines when the airline was on the verge of bankruptcy. The credit rating agencies had, in fact, given a negative rating to the company. These important facts were conspicuously ignored to serve the interests of Vijay Mallya, who at that time enjoyed the coveted position of being a member of Parliament.

How can one forget the case of Yes Bank, where loans were given to dubious firms under the leadership of executives who were later investigated for corruption? In each of these cases, powerful individuals inside the system either looked the other way or actively facilitated the misuse of funds. The RBI had to intervene, and a consortium led by State Bank of India had to come to the rescue of Yes Bank to save public interest.

Even the ICICI-Videocon bank loan scam was nothing but a case of personal interests of the then Managing Director Chanda Kochhar, who gave money in exchange for illegal gratification and undue benefit received in her husband's company.

These cases did not happen due to worsening market conditions or recessionary trends. In fact, the leaders did not stand true to their commitment to public money. These cases, in fact, showcase bad leadership, a lack of governance, and accountability.

The Union Bank case is nowhere comparable to these regarding financial magnitude. However, they certainly highlight a common thread—erosion of the value system, failure of governance structures, and a culture of flouting rules with impunity, allowing senior functionaries to act without adequate scrutiny.

Every time a decision like this goes unchecked, it sets a dangerous precedent. It signals that public institutions can spend large sums on vanity projects without accountability. It tells employees at the lowest rungs, constantly pushed to meet targets, that rules are for some, not all. And worst of all, it erodes public trust.

Public sector banks are not merely banks. They act as a lifeline to the poorest of the poor, who cannot afford to use the services of private sector banks and maintain a minimum balance. They are a safety net for the elderly, who draw their pensions and use several social security schemes.

It is a matter of trust that people queue up in the heat to open Jan Dhan accounts. Women save in small amounts so their daughters can study. Farmers mortgage gold to survive a bad season. When a bank treats their savings carelessly, it is not just a financial issue. It is a moral issue.

The case, however, points to the need for having greater independence in day-to-day banking operations and better governance processes to ensure that public money is treated with utmost care, transparency, and accountability. Public sector banks should not be treated as extensions of bureaucratic patronage. They have been created to serve the general public, not to suit the mandates of those who enjoy power. Rather, their mandate is to safeguard public money, practice the highest levels of ethics and governance, and propel national development.

The incident should act as an eye-opener for the entire banking sector and the Reserve Bank of India. Being the highest and independent authority, the RBI should come up with stricter disclosure and governance processes and mechanisms to maintain independence in financial transactions. In fact, such demands have been made every time the public is betrayed. However, such pleas have often been given lip service.

Public sector banks are not just commercial entities. They are national assets. Their accountability should extend beyond regular compliances. It should extend to supporting households, small businesses, farmers, and those who have still been excluded from banking services. They should hold themselves accountable to the mission they were formed for, rather than getting distracted and indulging in frivolous and baseless transactions.