India’s banking services will remain partially affected on Thursday, July 16, as banks in select states are closed to observe regional festivals, according to the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) holiday calendar for the financial year 2026-27.

Customers in most parts of the country can continue to access banking services as usual, while branches in Odisha, Uttarakhand and Manipur will remain shut for local celebrations.

Banks closed today in these states

Banks will remain closed on July 16 in the following states:

• Odisha – Rath Yatra
• Uttarakhand – Harela
• Manipur – Kang festival

Apart from these states, bank branches across the rest of India are expected to function normally.

How does RBI decide bank holidays?

The Reserve Bank of India prepares a state-wise holiday calendar covering national, religious and regional occasions. Since several festivals are celebrated only in specific states, bank holidays may differ from one region to another.

In addition to these notified holidays, banks across the country remain closed on the second and fourth Saturdays of every month, as well as on all Sundays.

When is the next bank holiday?

According to the RBI’s holiday schedule, the next notified bank holiday falls on July 17, 2026, in Sikkim to mark the Death Anniversary of U Tirot Singh.

Customers are advised to check the holiday schedule applicable to their respective state before planning a visit to a bank branch.

Will online banking services remain available?

Although physical bank branches may remain closed in the affected states, customers can continue using digital banking services. Mobile banking, internet banking, UPI transactions, ATM withdrawals and other online banking facilities are expected to remain available, enabling uninterrupted access to essential financial services.

The Centre is reviewing responses submitted by WhatsApp, Telegram and Zoho Bharat Eye regarding their username-based messaging features, as the government evaluates whether regulatory action is required. A notification on the issue could be issued within the next 20 days.

MeitY examines responses from messaging platforms

According to sources in the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), WhatsApp, Telegram and Zoho Bharat Eye have responded to government notices concerning username-based messaging features.

The ministry’s legal team is scrutinising the replies to determine whether any existing legal provisions have been violated and whether any clauses can be invoked for regulatory action or sanctions.

Speaking on the sidelines of the launch of a cybersecurity report on Monday, MeitY Secretary S. Krishnan confirmed that WhatsApp’s response had been received over the weekend and is currently under examination.

“The reply was received last week. We are examining the response and action, if any, will be taken after that examination,” he said.

Government stresses uniform regulatory approach

The government has maintained that any regulatory framework introduced in connection with username-based messaging will apply equally across all messaging platforms rather than targeting any single service.

Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw has indicated that a notification on the matter is expected within the next 20 days. The ongoing review is focused on examining the legal implications rather than being a purely policy exercise.

Why the government raised concerns

MeitY had issued notices to WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal after expressing concerns that username-based messaging, which allows users to communicate without sharing their phone numbers, could be misused for impersonation, phishing, identity theft and so-called “digital arrest” scams.

Earlier, a WhatsApp spokesperson said the platform is primarily designed as a private messaging service that helps people stay connected with friends and family.

The review forms part of the government’s broader efforts to strengthen online safety, curb the misuse of digital communication platforms and ensure that any future regulations are implemented uniformly across messaging services.

The Delhi Police on Tuesday arrested Lucknow University law students Prabal Pratap Singh and Chandrabhan for disrupting proceedings inside the Supreme Court. The incident took place on July 10 in Courtroom No. 13 during a hearing before the bench of Justice K.V. Viswanathan and Justice Alok Aradhe.

Police said Prabal Pratap Singh, a third-year LLB student from Etawah, Uttar Pradesh, interrupted the court proceedings by shouting slogans, using abusive language against Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant, throwing court papers into the air, and creating chaos inside the courtroom. His associate, Chandrabhan, allegedly supported the disruption.

Security personnel in the Supreme Court overpowered the two and removed them from the courtroom, allowing the hearing to resume. The Court had magnanimously let them go without punishing them, CJI Surya Kant had also dismissed any action against the two law students saying they were like children.

Police said the accused had approached the Supreme Court in connection with a legal dispute after challenging an order of the Allahabad High Court. Investigators believe the disruption was linked to dissatisfaction with the progress of the case, although the exact motive is still being examined.

Following the incident, the Tilak Marg Police Station registered an FIR under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including charges of obstructing public servants from performing their duties, disturbing judicial proceedings, and acting with common intention. After their arrest, both accused were produced before a Delhi court, which remanded them to two days of police custody for questioning.

The incident has raised fresh concerns over security inside the country’s highest court. Although the Supreme Court has strict entry procedures and multiple security checks, the disruption has prompted authorities to review existing security arrangements to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Police are now analyzing CCTV footage, questioning the accused, and investigating whether anyone else was involved or if the act was planned in advance. Further legal action will depend on the findings of the investigation.