Mukesh Kumar Pukhraj Jain: ED arrests agent in Goa fraud case

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) said its Panaji Zonal Office arrested Mukesh Kumar Pukhraj Jain, also known as Mukesh Bhai, on 16 October 2026 in a money-laundering investigation arising from a Goa resident’s alleged loss of about Rs 2.6 crore to a “digital arrest” fraud. In a press release dated 19 October 2026, the agency identified Jain as the sixth person arrested in the case.

The ED alleged that Jain arranged bank transfers for a network that received cyber-fraud proceeds, converted them into cash and then into foreign currency. He was arrested under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, the law under which the agency is investigating the handling of the alleged criminal proceeds.

The agency said accounts belonging to the network appeared in more than 300 victim complaints and over 160 first information reports (FIRs) across more than 20 States and Union Territories. Those complaints involved reported losses of about Rs 417 crore. That figure concerns the wider network, rather than the loss attributed to the Goa complainant alone.

Bank transfers allegedly exchanged for cash

The ED described Jain as an RTGS agent whose role was to arrange credits into the network’s bank accounts through brokers. In exchange, the agency alleged, he received cash from people controlling the network and retained a commission. The alleged role places him in the movement of funds after the cyber fraud, rather than identifying him as the person who made the calls to the Goa resident.

According to the ED’s release, Jain admitted in statements recorded under the PMLA that he knew the money passing through this chain came from cyber frauds, including digital-arrest scams. This is the agency’s account of his statements, not a finding of guilt by a court.

The ED also alleged that Jain destroyed records and mobile handsets containing evidence of the business after its searches. It said he failed to attend on the date fixed for recording his statement and gave evasive answers when he subsequently appeared. The release does not contain a response from Jain or his counsel to these allegations.

How the Goa complaint led to a wider investigation

The investigation began with an FIR registered by the Cyber Crime Police Station, North Goa, the ED said. According to the agency, the victim was kept on a video call, persuaded that she was under criminal investigation and coerced into transferring money to accounts falsely presented as “Secret Supervision Accounts”.

The New Indian Express, reporting the ED’s earlier account, dated the FIR to 9 June 2025 and said the transfers occurred between 21 May and 2 June 2025. It reported that the victim’s money moved within hours through dormant and newly opened accounts before being split across more than 400 beneficiary accounts.

“Digital arrest” describes the fraudsters’ method of intimidation, not a lawful form of detention. In its advisory dated 6 March 2025, the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) said Indian law contains no concept of digital arrest. The advisory described criminals impersonating government and law-enforcement officials, making false accusations and forcing victims to remain on video calls while demanding money.

In this investigation, the ED’s reported focus extends beyond the initial deception to the companies and accounts allegedly used to process its proceeds. The New Indian Express reported the agency’s allegation that commodity-trading, travel and foreign-exchange entities formed an interconnected network, including companies licensed by the Reserve Bank of India as Full Fledged Money Changers. The ED alleged that these businesses were used to turn bank credits into cash and then foreign currency.

The newspaper reported banking transactions exceeding Rs 27,850 crore and cash deposits of approximately Rs 2,904 crore across the entities, citing the ED. These are measures of account activity, distinct from the reported victim losses. They should not be read as establishing that every transaction represented fraud proceeds.

The ED also alleged that companies were incorporated in the names of employees and drivers who appeared as directors on paper, while others controlled their accounts and affairs, according to The New Indian Express.

Earlier arrests and the custody position

Before Jain’s arrest, the ED had arrested Fahim Moin Hussain Sayed and Naim Mueen Sayyed on 23 August 2026, Zee Business reported. Its account linked those arrests to the same Goa complaint and alleged bank-transfer-to-cash conversion network.

Telangana Today subsequently reported the arrests of Bhushan Suryakant Moye, Vilas Narayan Pawar and Shailesh Dagdu Chavan on 27 August, bringing the total at that stage to five. Citing an ED statement, it said the agency accused Moye, a chartered accountant, of incorporating 21 network companies, Pawar of arranging bank-transfer entries and Chavan of supplying cash against those transfers. These remain allegations attributed to the agency.

The ED’s 19 October release said the investigation was continuing. It recorded that the Special Court (PMLA), Goa, had remanded Jain to ED custody until 19 October 2026. The release does not establish whether his custody was extended or changed after that date.