IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.24370 of 2026
Date of Decision: 14.05.2026
Sanjay Sinha
..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
..... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ
Present: Mr. P. S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Deepinder Singh Virk, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Tarun Yadav, Advocate
for the complainants.
Mr. L. S. Saini, Advocate (thorugh VC)
for the victim-Meenu Gupta.
*****
RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.
1. Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.174, dated 28.06.2023, under Sections 420 and 120-B of IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station Udyog Vihar, District Gurugram.
2. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Sumit Sharma. It was alleged that the complainant was the Authorized Representative of M/s Om Logistics Limited. It was alleged that the company of the accused, i.e. M/s GGJ Solutions Private Limited operating the brand name ‘Ichhapurti’ having its corporate office at Plot No.112, 3rd Floor, Udyog Vihar, Phase-1, Gurugram. Sanjay Sinha (Director), i.e. the petitioner and others entered into the business arrangements with various parties for providing logistics, transportation, manpower supply, material supply services and also for operating Super Franchise and Business Partner Models. It was alleged that during the period, i.e. from July, 2021 to March, 2022, the accused company availed the services of logistics, transportation, manpower supply and material supply from several complainant parties and also induced various shopkeepers and business entities to become super franchise and business partners by promising profitable business opportunities. It was further alleged that after completion of the services and transactions, the complainant parties raised bills and invoices as per the agreed terms, however the accused company failed to clear the outstanding dues despite repeated requests. It was alleged that the total amount of Rs.3,68,17,844.77/- remained outstanding towards the services provided by various complainant parties including Om Logistics Ltd., Super India Transport Co., Khanna Rentals, Roman Networks Pvt. Ltd, GR Infotech and several super franchise partners such as Maruti Sales, Mohan Automobiles, Ayush Mobile, Soni Mobile and others and despite repeated email reminders, communication and personal meetings, the accused company allegedly avoided the payment and kept postponing the matter, however, ultimately refused to clear the outstanding dues. Thus, the request was made to take legal action against the accused persons. On the basis of the same, the FIR was registered. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. Resultantly, the petitioner (one of the director) was arrested on 23.02.2026. On completion of the investigation, the challan was presented. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 18.04.2026. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petition.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. He has submitted that the petitioner is a successful, established and reputed businessman, who has been carrying on the business in the field of manpower and services for the last about 21 years under the name and style of Frontline (NCR) Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. He has submitted that the petitioner is merely an investor in M/s GGJ Solutions Pvt. Ltd and is himself a victim as he was induced to invest Rs.5 Crores in different branches and operational segments of the accused company for purposes, such as payment of salaries, hiring of office spaces, meeting other business and operational expenses, etc. He has further submitted that the petitioner has been made a scapegoat in the present case. He has submitted that the petitioner did not hold any share in the accused company and he was only a director and an investor in the company. He has submitted that there
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.