Anticipatory Bail Granted in Alleged Fake Bank Account & IT Refund Fraud Case

High Court grants relief noting improbabilities in prosecution case and absence of prima facie evidence

High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail in Rs. 45 Lakh Fake Account Fraud Case

Meetu Kumari | Mar 28, 2026 |

Anticipatory Bail Granted in Alleged Fake Bank Account & IT Refund Fraud Case

Anticipatory Bail Granted in Alleged Fake Bank Account & IT Refund Fraud Case

The petitioner was accused in a complaint case alleging offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, where the complainant claimed that his Aadhaar and PAN were misused to open a bank account in Axis Bank and siphon off income tax refunds amounting to Rs. 45.5 lakh.

According to the complainant, he had approached the petitioner for assistance in obtaining income tax refunds. Later, he discovered that refunds were credited into another account allegedly opened in his name, and the amount was withdrawn. It was further alleged that the petitioner initially agreed to return Rs. 10 lakh but later refused.

The petitioner, however, denied the allegations, asserting that the bank account was genuine and operated with the complainant’s knowledge. The petitioner also argued that the complaint was motivated by business disputes involving a third party.

Issue Before Court: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case alleging fraudulent opening of a bank account and misappropriation of income tax refunds.

HC’s Order: The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, finding merit in his submissions and noting serious inconsistencies in the complainant’s version.

The Court observed that if the account were truly fake, it was unlikely that funds would be directly transferred to the petitioner’s housing loan account, thereby creating traceable evidence against himself. It also found it improbable that the complainant remained unaware for years (2014-2017) about the non-receipt of substantial income tax refunds.

The Court noted that the bank itself had stated the account was genuine. The delay in raising objections and the circumstances surrounding the dispute indicated that the criminal proceedings might have been initiated due to business disagreements rather than genuine fraud.

Thus, the Court held that the petitioner deserved protection from arrest and directed that he be released on anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC / BNSS.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

StudyCafe Membership

Join StudyCafe Membership. For More details about Membership Click Join Membership Button
Join Membership

In case of any Doubt regarding Membership you can mail us at [email protected]

Join Studycafe's WhatsApp Group or Telegram Channel for Latest Updates on Government Job, Sarkari Naukri, Private Jobs, Income Tax, GST, Companies Act, Judgements and CA, CS, ICWA, and MUCH MORE!"




Author Bio
My Recent Articles
HC: Income Tax Returns Not Automatically Relevant in NI Act Proceedings; Direction to Produce Set Aside ITAT: 2855-Day Delay Condoned Where Assessee Acted on Bona Fide Belief Due to Conflicting CPC Communications ITAT: Co-operative Society Eligible for Section 80P Deduction Despite Nominal Members; Interest Income Partly Taxable as “Other Sources” Agricultural Land Status Retained Despite Temporary Non-Use, Rules ITAT ITAT Deletes Penalty; Disallowance of Section 54 Claim Not ConcealmentView All Posts