Patna High Court
Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Kumar SarrafversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that, on a prima facie basis, the petitioner is implicated in large‑scale fraudulent transactions and is not entitled to pre‑arrest bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Mukesh Kumar Sarraf, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case alleging cheating and fraud involving Rs 60 lakhs paid by an ex‑serviceman informant for a disputed property. The informant claimed the money was deposited in the petitioner’s Axis Bank “Saving‑Easy Access” scheme and that five cheques issued by the petitioner were dishonoured, leading to an FIR under IPC sections 406, 467, 468, 471/34 and NI Act section 138. The petitioner argued he was innocent, that only Rs 26,95,000 was actually transferred, and that he was ready to return the amount pending verification. The State and the informant contended that the petitioner, with his family, deliberately induced the investment, has prior similar offences, and therefore should not be released on bail. After examining the bank statements showing large, unexplained transactions, the court held that the petitioner could not be considered a mere land broker and that the prima‑facie case warranted denial of bail, directing tax authorities to furnish GST and income‑tax details before the district court re‑considers the matter. The bail application was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted in offences of cheating, forgery and dishonour of cheques under IPC sections 406, 467, 468, 471/34 and NI Act section 138.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of willingness to return the money and alleged lack of criminal intent outweighs the alleged fraud and his antecedent record.
- Whether the court should defer the bail decision pending investigation by the Income Tax and State Tax Departments regarding the source of large‑scale transactions.
Legislation cited
- Goods and Services Tax Act
- Income Tax Act
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 406, 467, 468, 471
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- cheating
- fraud
- IPC
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- bank cheques
- property dispute
- antecedent record
- tax investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4486 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-415 Year-2024 Thana- BUXAR District- Buxar
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Kumar Sarraf S/o Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Kumar
Sarraf R/o Old Aluminum Factory, Naibajar, PS- Buxar Nagar Thana,
District- Buxar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Chandan Kumar Singh S/o Dharmraj Singh R/o vill - Rampur, P.s.- Badhara
Ara, Distt.- Bhojpur, Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Apurv Harsh, Advocate
Mr. Manu Tripurari, Advocate
Mr. Raghu Raj Pratap, Advocate
Ms. Tanu Priya, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
5 07-05-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner; learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
O.P. No.2.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Buxar Nagar Thana P.S. Case No. 415 of 2024 registered
for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 406, 467, 468,
471/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of N.I. Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
informant paid an advance amount of Rs.60 lakhs to Mukesh
Kumar Sarraf (the petitioner), his brother Randhir Sarraf, and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4486 of 2026(5) dt.07-05-2026
2/7
his father Vijay Sarraf for the purchase of a property.
Subsequently, upon inquiry, the informant discovered that the
said property was disputed and encumbered with several legal
issues. Thereafter, the informant approached the petitioner and
demanded refund of the aforesaid amount of Rs.60 lakhs. In
response, the petitioner issued five cheques of Rs.12 lakhs each,
totaling Rs.60 lakhs. However, when the said cheques were
presented for encashment, they were dishonoured by the bank,
compelling the informant to lodge the present FIR.
4. Mr. Apurv Harsh, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned
counsel further submitted that it is not disputed that the
informant had advanced a sum of Rs. 26,95,000/- to the
petitioner through bank transactions. However, it has been
falsely alleged that the petitioner, along with his family
members had induced the informant to invest the said amount in
Axis Bank under a scheme namely “Savings–Easy Access”
bearing Account No. 922010053439734 for the period
commencing from 01.04.2023 to 31.12.2023. It is further
submitted that all transactions are duly reflected and verified
from the bank statements relating to the said account. Learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4486 of 2026(5) dt.07-05-2026
3/7
counsel further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing
to return the entire amount claimed by the informant, subject to
proper verification of the mode and manner through which the
remaining amount of Rs. 26,95,000/- is alleged to have been
transferred or paid, and therefore, the petitioner seeks his release
on pre-arrest bail.
5. Per contra, Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jha, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of O.P. No. 2, submitted that the
informant is an ex-serviceman and that the petitioner, in
connivance with his family members, dishonestly induced him
to part with a sum of Rs. 60 lakhs on the pretext of providing a
property. Learned counsel submitted that despite receiving the
said amount, neither was any specific property disclosed nor has
the amount been returned to the informant. It is further
submitted that the petitioner had issued five cheques of Rs. 12
lakhs each, totalling Rs. 60 lakhs, towards repayment of the
amount received from the informant. However, upon
presentation, all the cheques were dishonoured by the bank.
Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has three
criminal antecedents, out of which two are of similar nature,
being habitually involved in the offences. It is, therefore,
contended that a clear case of cheating and fraud is made out
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4486 of 2026(5) dt.07-05-2026
4/7
against the petitioner and, as such, he don’t deserve to be
released on pre-arrest bail.
6. Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned APP for the State
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail. He
submitted that the petitioner by way of Annexure P/4 has
brought certain transaction which cannot relate that the same is
between the informant. The informant though has filed a counter
affidavit being an ex-service man has not given description
regarding his bank account. It is admitted by the parties that for
total amount of rupees sixty lacs, as claimed by the informant,
the petitioner has issued five cheques, amounting to rupees
twelve lacs each. Further referring to Annexure P/4, learned
counsel submitted that the complicity of the petitioner along
with the informant cannot be denied, considering that the
scheme in which the petitioner and O.P. No.2 both have invested
which is run by the Axis Bank and from the statement brought
on record, it appears that name of scheme is “Saving-Easy
Access”. O.P. No.2/the informant has also contributed in the
said account, opened in the name of Mukesh Kumar (petitioner),
Old Allmuniam Factory, Naibajar, Buxar. Learned counsel
further submitted that it cannot be said that both the parties have
jointly proceeded to commit fraud with the State Government in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4486 of 2026(5) dt.07-05-2026
5/7
payment of tax dues on account of business transaction which
may be in respect of Central GST, as well as, State GST. He
further submitted that the transaction reflects for the period
01.04.2023 to 31.12.2023 is of huge amount and such huge
amount cannot be in respect of any simple business run by the
parties. In these backgrounds, learned counsel submitted that the
petitioner don’t deserve to be released on pre-arrest bail, as he
has not come before this Court with clean hands.
7. Having heard the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties and upon perusal of the allegations made in
the FIR, this Court finds that the informant claims to have
transferred certain amounts into the petitioner of the petitioner
in a scheme namely “Saving Easy Access” which is verifiable
from the account opened in the Axis Bank (Annexure P/4). This
Court has also perused the details of the transactions and the
manner in which deposits were made into the account of the
petitioner, as well as, the pattern in which amounts were
credited and debited therefrom. The petitioner has specifically
marked certain entries in the bank statement issued by the Bank
to show deposits allegedly made by the informant on different
dates. The transactions pertain to the period from 01.04.2023 to
31.12.2023, during which an amount of Rs. 1,12,10,788.07 was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4486 of 2026(5) dt.07-05-2026
6/7
debited and an amount of Rs. 1,12,11,302/- was credited in the
said account. From the nature and volume of the transactions
reflected in the account statement, this Court is of the prima
facie view that the petitioner cannot be said to be merely an
ordinary land broker his past record is also not sound. It further
appears that substantial amounts have been withdrawn in cash
and transactions have also been carried out with certain entities
and organizations such as Chaitanya Federation, Shaker Traders,
Ujjivan Small Finance Bank Limited and other such concerns.
8. What further emerges from the transaction details
brought on record by way of Annexure P/4 is that the petitioner
appears to be involved in large-scale monetary transactions.
However, except for one entry relating to GST charges
amounting to Rs. 94.40 towards cheque book charges and
another amount of Rs. 2,292.82 charged by the Bank towards
cash and RTGS transactions, there appears to be no clear
disclosure regarding the nature and source of the transactions
reflected in the account. In such circumstances, this Court
deems it proper to direct the Income Tax Department to furnish
details regarding the tax assessed and paid by the petitioner for
the preceding six financial years up to the current financial year.
Similarly, the State Tax Department is directed to furnish details
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4486 of 2026(5) dt.07-05-2026
7/7
relating to the Central GST, as well as, State GST paid by the
petitioner in respect of any goods or business transactions
before the learned District Court within a period of three weeks.
The learned District Court upon receipt of the relevant
information, shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law
without being prejudiced by its earlier order dated 25.11.2025,
rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner forthwith,
preferably within one week.
9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Bihar.
10. The present bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.