Amlan Dutta vs State Of Haryana

CRM CRM-M-64881 CRM CRM 64881 64881-2026 64881 2026 2026 2026
1


109 109 109 109
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
ATCHANDIGARH ATCHANDIGARH ATCHANDIGARH ATCHANDIGARH

CRM-M-64881 CRM 64881-2026 2026
CRM CRM 64881 64881 2026 2026

Amlan Dutta
....Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana
....Respondent

Date of Decision: Date of Decision: November 13 Date of Decision: Date of Decision: November 13 November 13, 2026 November 13 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026
Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: November 13 Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: November 13 November 13, 2026 November 13 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
CORAM: CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present Present: Present Present Mr. Jitender Chaudhary, Advocate and
Mr. Kulwinder Bhargav, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana
(on advance service on advance service on advance service of copy of petition on advance service of copy of petition of copy of petition). of copy of petition


SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral)

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’)
for grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR
No.494 dated 13.08.2026, registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 318(4) & 61(2) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Sadar
Gurugram, District Gurugram.
2. For the sake of ease, relevant factual milieu drawn from the
order dated 13.10.2026 passed by the concerned Sessions Court (whereby
anticipatory bail plea of the petitioner was rejected), reads thus:
“ 2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the present
case has been registered on the complaint of complainant Abhishek Kumar
Gupta. It has been stated in the complaint that accused Amlan Dutta has
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.13 16:03
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-64881 CRM CRM 64881 64881-2026 64881 2026 2026 2026
2

stated to the complainants that he is working as Vice President Sales and
Strategy in Trehan Iris (T.S.Realtech Pvt. Ltd), Sector 48, Sohna Road,
Gurugram and company has given full rights in authority letter for selling
flats, shops etc and he is serving in the company for the last three years. It
is further submitted that complainant Abhishek Kumar Gupta Paid
Rs.50,00,000 through on lines and bank transfer which is to be invested in
Omara Project running by Trehan Iris group and thereafter company sell
out the same and then whatever premium come out the company will pay
the same. Further, Suvendu Banerjee paid Rs.2,30,05,000/- through bank
transfer which is to be invested in Omara Project and Iris Broadway
Project running by Trehan Iris group and thereafter company sell out the
same and then whatever premium come out the company will pay the
same. Further, similarly Sanket Kaparia paid Rs.3,85,00,000/- and Mohit
Kumar paid Rs.70,00,000/-to invest in Omara Project running by Trehan
Iris group and thereafter company sell out the same and then whatever
premium come out the company will pay the same.
On their inquiry from the company, it was told that applicant-
accused Amlan Dutta was working there for the last three years and now
the company has expelled him on the basis of suspicion, then the
applicants said that they have invested on the basis of their company, now
they are not willing to invest their money and asked to return their money.
Upon which the authorized person of the company got angry and pushed
them out of the company and said that they should find Amlan Dutta and
recover the amount from him.
Thereafter they called up Amlan Dutta and asked for their money,
then Amlan Dutta said that he will get them implicated in a false case and
threatened to get them killed and after that the Amlan Dutta switched off
his both phones and fled away from the rented house. Now they are fully
apprehensive that the culprit has conspired with Tirhan Iris Company and
defrauded them by preparing fake documents and giving false promises of
investment. Due to threats from the culprit, they are facing grave danger to
their lives and property. They prayed for taking action against them. On
the basis of complaint, present FIR number 494 dated 13.08.2026 under
sections 318(4), 61(2) BNS was registered at Police Station Sadar, District
Gurugram. ”

Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that a bare perusal
3.
of the FIR itself shows that allegations leveled against the petitioner are
concocted, improbable and devoid of any merit. Learned counsel has further
iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question.
It has been urged that the FIR itself reflects a commercial and investment
dispute between the complainants and the Company, which has been given a
criminal colour after the petitioner lodged a complaint against the Company’s
controlling persons. It has been submitted that the petitioner was employed as
Vice-President (Sales & Strategy) with M/s TS Realtech Pvt. Ltd., operating
under the name “Trehan IRIS”, and had acted merely on the instructions of the
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.13 16:03
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-64881 CRM CRM 64881 64881-2026 64881 2026 2026 2026
3

Company’s authorities. Learned counsel has argued that the petitioner’s
personal bank account was used by the Company as a conduit for routing
transactions, particularly since its projects, namely, Omara and Iris Broadway,
were not RERA-registered. The funds so received were allegedly utilised
towards discharge of the Company’s debts and liabilities, as reflected in the
petitioner’s ledger accounts. It has further been urged that the petitioner was in
regular communication with the Company’s Executive Directors, Aman Trehan
and Abhishek Trehan, through a WhatsApp group and had communicated with
investors and brokers through his official domain email account. Learned
counsel has further contended that the petitioner was removed from service on
15.05.2026 without any show-cause notice or opportunity of hearing and was
thereafter threatened and pressurised to remain silent. In this regard, the
petitioner had submitted a representation dated 18.05.2026 to the police
apprehending threat to his life and personal safety from Aman Trehan,
Abhishek Trehan and Gyan Prakash. It has also been argued that there was no
dishonest or fraudulent intention on the part of the petitioner at the inception of
the transactions. Learned counsel has iterated that the notices under Section
35(3) BNSS were issued to the petitioner’s father and not to the petitioner
himself, and, therefore, his non-appearance cannot be construed as wilful
disobedience of any such notice. Learned counsel has contended that the order
declining anticipatory bail to the petitioner does not disclose any reasons for
observing that the petitioner’s counsel “made excuses”, nor does it explain as to
why the absence of WhatsApp communications on record outweighs the
documentary material available and the admissions made by the Investigating
Officer.
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.13 16:03
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-64881 CRM CRM 64881 64881-2026 64881 2026 2026 2026
4

3.1. Learned counsel has argued that nothing is to be recovered from
the petitioner. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is
ready and willing to join investigation. On the basis of the aforementioned
submissions, grant of the instant petition is prayed for.
4. Per contra , learned State counsel has opposed the grant of
anticipatory bail by arguing that serious allegations have been levelled
against the petitioner. It has been iterated that the petitioner, while working
as Vice-President (Sales & Strategy), lured the complainants/ investors and
received huge amount in his personal bank account. Learned State counsel
has submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to
recover fraudulent proceeds, to investigate the amount received in cash, and
to ascertain the role of other accused in the crime. The petitioner does not
bear clean antecedents. It has been submitted that considering seriousness of
the allegations, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for fair
and effective investigation. Given the severity of the offence, there exists a
substantial likelihood that the petitioner may abscond or tamper with the
evidence, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail. Thus, dismissal of the petition
in hand is prayed for.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have
gone through the available record of the case.
6. As per the prosecution case, the allegations against the
petitioner are serious in nature. Perusal of the prosecution case, material
available on record, as also the order whereby anticipatory bail of the
petitioner was declined by the concerned Sessions Court, prima facie reveals
that the petitioner was working as Vice-President (Sales & Strategy) with
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.13 16:03
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-64881 CRM CRM 64881 64881-2026 64881 2026 2026 2026
5

M/s TS Realtech Pvt. Ltd. at the time when the four complainants made their
investments. It is further the case of the prosecution that the investment
amount pertaining to the Company’s Omara Project was received in the
petitioner’s personal bank account, and the petitioner himself admitted that
his personal account was used by the Company as a conduit for routing
transactions and that he acted on the instructions of the Company’s
authorities, allegedly communicated through WhatsApp. Learned Court
below noted that the petitioner had failed to produce any such WhatsApp
instructions or supporting material before it. Keeping in the view factual
milieu of the case in hand; especially seriousness & gravity of the
allegations; this Court is of the, prima facie , opinion that the petitioner does
not deserve the concession of extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail.
6.1. The consideration(s) for grant of anticipatory bail acquire a
somewhat distinct complexion in cases involving economic offence(s). Such
offence(s), though invariably not attended by physical violence, cannot on
that account be regarded as less serious. Economic offence(s) are frequently
characterised by calculated design, deliberation, sophistication and a
conscious abuse of financial, commercial and fiduciary mechanisms. Unlike
an offence which may be committed in a moment of passion, impulse or
sudden provocation, an economic offence(s) may, indubitably depending
upon its factual matrix, involve a preconceived course of conduct,
preparation, manipulation of records or transactions, diversion or layering of
funds, creation of fictitious documentation, misuse of corporate or fiduciary
structures, concealment of the proceeds or coordinated participation of
several persons. The absence of physical violence, therefore, cannot by itself
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.13 16:03
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-64881 CRM CRM 64881 64881-2026 64881 2026 2026 2026
6

dilute the seriousness of the alleged criminality or the potential
consequences flowing therefrom.
6.2. This distinction assumes particular significance where the
allegations, prima facie , does not merely disclose a general or omnibus
allegation against the accused, but contains specific and direct accusation(s)
connecting the individual with the alleged transaction or the modus operandi
of the offence. Where the accusation is founded upon identifiable
transactions, documentary material, financial trails, communications,
corporate records, statements, digital evidence or other contemporaneous
material which, at the stage of consideration of anticipatory bail, prima facie
attributes a definite and active role to the accused, the Court would
necessarily be required to approach the prayer for anticipatory bail with
greater circumspection. The Court is not expected, at the stage of
anticipatory bail, to conduct a meticulous appreciation of evidence as would
be undertaken at trial; nevertheless, it is equally impermissible to disregard
material of substantial probative significance which, on a prima facie
assessment, demonstrates a direct nexus between the accused and the alleged
criminal conduct.
6.3. Perusal of the petition in hand shows that the petitioner has
himself admitted therein that he is involved in 01 more FIR(s). The aforesaid
criminal antecedent(s) reveal that petitioner is a habitual offender with a
tendency to indulge in criminal activities. Such antecedent(s) cannot be
brushed aside as a mere coincidence and are a relevant consideration while
adjudicating the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. The criminal
antecedent(s) of petitioner also raise a reasonable apprehension that, if
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.13 16:03
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-64881 CRM CRM 64881 64881-2026 64881 2026 2026 2026
7

enlarged on bail, he may indulge in similar criminal activities, misuse the
concession of bail, or interfere with the fair course of justice. The possibility
of his absconding or influencing prosecution witnesses also cannot be ruled
out.
6.4. The other pleas raised by the petitioner, including those of false
implication etc., are matters to be adjudicated on the basis of evidence
during the course of trial. Such disputed questions of fact(s) cannot be
conclusively determined at the stage of consideration of the petitioner’s
prayer for anticipatory bail.
6.5. No cause nay plausible cause has been shown, at this stage,
from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely
implicated into the present FIR.
7. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for
grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding
individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon
with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the
accused; the need for free and fair investigation as also the deeper and wider
impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that every
person in the Society can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear
of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that
prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which
has come on record and preliminary investigation appear to establish a
reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.13 16:03
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-64881 CRM CRM 64881 64881-2026 64881 2026 2026 2026
8

in effective investigation. In State State State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997
SCC (Cri) 1039] SCC (Cri) 1039], the Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) SCC (Cri) 1039] SCC (Cri) 1039]
“ 6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is
qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well-
ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case
like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous
advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which
would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the
suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest
bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such
a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial
interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-
degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be
advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that
responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner
and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not
conduct themselves as offenders. ”

8. In view of the seriousness & gravity of the allegations, this
Court finds no compelling ground to extend the benefit of discretionary
relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Moreover, custodial interrogation
of the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation & to unravel the
truth. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed dismissed dismissed. dismissed
9. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression
of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.









(SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE
November 13 November 13, 2026 November 13 November 13 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026
mahavir
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether reportable: Yes/No
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.13 16:03
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment