One presiding officer dismissed the petitioner’s bail petition after granting interim anticipatory bail to several co-accused. Citing that disparity and concerns about the police probe, the Punjab And Haryana HC restrains Rohtak judges from entertaining bail applications in an alleged real estate fraud on homebuyers, and expects a senior IPS officer to take over the investigation.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Chandigarh: Judicial officers posted in the Sessions Division, Rohtak, have been restrained by the Punjab and Haryana High Court from entertaining bail applications in an FIR alleging cheating of homebuyers by developers. The Court also said it expects the State of Haryana to appoint a senior IPS officer to investigate the alleged scam [Subhash Gupta v. State of Haryana].
Justice N.S. Shekhawat passed the order of September 30, 2026 on an anticipatory bail petition filed by Subhash Gupta, a partner in Gupta Property Developers. Advocates Dinesh Arora, Jatin Sehra and Ashish Khatkar appeared for the petitioner, Senior Deputy Advocate General Rajiv Sidhu for the State of Haryana and Advocate R.S. Dhull for the complainant. The allegations are untested, the Court has not tried or decided the case on merits, and every accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Same presiding officer, different outcomes
The Court recorded that the presiding officer who dismissed the present petitioner’s bail petition had granted the concession of interim anticipatory bail to several co-accused, directors among them. It also noted that those co-accused were allegedly involved in other scams.
Taking a prima facie view at this stage, the Court said that every attempt had been made by the police to shield the real culprits and that the Investigating Officer apparently was trying to help the accused. These are observations made at the bail stage and are not findings of guilt or of the merits of any party’s case.
What the High Court ordered
As for the Rohtak courts, the Court directed:
the judicial officers posted at Sessions Division, Rohtak, are restrained from entertaining any bail applications
The restraint applies in the present case. A copy of the order is to go from the Registry to the District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak for strict compliance. On who should investigate, the Court said:
the State of Haryana is expected to appoint a senior IPS officer to investigate such a large-scale scam
The State has to file a status report before the next date, October 28, 2026, when the matter is listed.
ALSO READ: Punjab And Haryana HC Flags Malice In Demolition Against PIL Petitioner, Orders CBI Probe
The FIR behind the plea
The petition arises from FIR No. 127 dated May 27, 2026, registered at Police Station I.M.T., Rohtak, under Sections 420, 120-B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, which correspond to Sections 318(4), 61 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. According to the complainants, buyers paid for units in a residential project but received neither possession nor a refund. Among others, the FIR names directors of DHL Infratech Private Limited and of Gupta Property Developers.
The Court noted that it had earlier directed the Inspector General of Police to look into the investigation personally, and that a Special Investigation Team headed by the Superintendent of Police, Rohtak is now probing the matter. The petitioner’s arrest had been stayed on his assurance that he would return the amount invested by the investors with interest at 6 per cent per annum.
Why the order matters
Bail orders in a single FIR have usually been left to the discretion of the court concerned. Here the High Court has taken the unusual step of removing the Rohtak Sessions Division from the bail stage altogether after noticing that co-accused and the petitioner were treated differently by the same presiding officer. The Court has stated no finding against any judicial officer beyond recording the disparity.
The direction on a senior IPS officer signals that the High Court wants the probe in a large homebuyers fraud case to be led from above the local level. The allegations against the accused remain untested, and the Court has expressed no view on the final merits.
Case Title: Subhash Gupta v. State of Haryana [CRM-M-42815 of 2026]
Bench: Justice N.S. Shekhawat, Punjab and Haryana High Court
Date of Order: September 30, 2026
Appearances: Advocates Dinesh Arora, Jatin Sehra and Ashish Khatkar for the petitioner; Senior Deputy Advocate General Rajiv Sidhu for the State of Haryana; Advocate R.S. Dhull for the complainant