State Bank of India accepted a haircut of over Rs 1 lakh crore across 309 accounts resolved through the NCLT between FY2018 and FY2026. The lender also wrote off Rs 1.51 lakh crore in large corporate loans with a low recovery rate. These figures highlight the significant legacy of bad loans on the bank's balance sheet, even as its current asset quality metrics have significantly improved.
State Bank of India (SBI) has absorbed a total haircut of more than Rs 1 lakh crore across 309 accounts processed through the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) between FY2018 and FY2026. This data, accessed via Right to Information (RTI) channels, reveals that the bank recovered roughly 33% of its total claims during these insolvency proceedings. A haircut represents the difference between the amount the bank was owed and the amount it was eventually able to recover, essentially acting as a loss on the loan portfolio.
In addition to these NCLT-led resolutions, the bank’s historical financial data shows significant technical write-offs for large corporate borrowers with loan exposures exceeding Rs 100 crore. Between FY2017 and FY2026, SBI wrote off Rs 1,51,857 crore in this category. The recovery rate for these specific write-offs was substantially lower, totaling Rs 20,838 crore, or approximately 14%. Technical write-offs are used by banks to remove unrecoverable assets from their balance sheets, though the bank continues to pursue recovery efforts legally.
While these figures underscore the heavy cost of past credit cycles, they must be viewed in the context of the bank's current financial health. As of March 31, 2026, SBI has significantly cleaned up its balance sheet, reporting a Gross NPA (Non-Performing Asset) ratio of 1.49% and a Net NPA ratio of 0.39%. This marks a substantial improvement from the years when the bank was burdened by high levels of stressed assets and corporate defaults. The aggressive provisioning and write-offs over the last decade have been a primary factor in this improved asset quality.
The disclosure also highlights an ongoing governance issue regarding transparency. The bank has declined requests to reveal the specific identities of the borrowers involved in these settlements, citing commercial confidentiality and fiduciary duties. For investors, this creates a limitation in assessing the historical risk management of specific lending decisions. However, the focus for the market remains on the bank’s ability to maintain its currently low NPA levels and manage fresh slippages.
Looking ahead, investors may track the bank’s recovery trends from written-off accounts and its ongoing provisioning requirements. The ability of the bank to maintain its current asset quality, despite the legacy of large corporate write-offs, remains a key monitorable. Additionally, any updates regarding the recovery of the remaining 67% in NCLT cases or shifts in the bank’s disclosure policies regarding major defaulters could influence investor sentiment on governance and transparency.