Mridul Gupta vs. State Of Haryana
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Mridul Gupta, sought anticipatory bail in FIR No. 305 dated 20.12.2024, registered at Police Station Udyog Vihar, Gurugram, under various sections of the IPC and BNS. The FIR alleged a conspiracy involving employees of Hitachi Astemo Gurugram Powertrain Systems Pvt. Ltd. and sham vendors to defraud the company of approximately ₹12.767 crores. The employees allegedly fabricated purchase requests, purchase orders, and forged signatures, misusing the SAP system to process fake invoices from non-existent vendors. The petitioner, as the proprietor of Burgeon International, is accused of conniving with the employees and raising invoices without supplying goods. The petitioner claims his firm is duly registered, possesses a GST number, has a bank account, and has conducted legitimate business with independent suppliers and the complainant, providing supporting documentation like e-invoices and e-way bills. The State opposed the bail, highlighting evidence such as bank statements showing ₹3.19 crores received by the petitioner from the complainant on the basis of fake bills, RTGS transactions of ₹26 lacs deposited by the petitioner after the FIR, and his name appearing in a co-accused's disclosure statement.
Held
The Court dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail. The Court found that the petitioner, along with co-accused, was involved in a serious economic fraud amounting to ₹12.76 crores. The Court noted that the petitioner, as the sole proprietor of M/s Burgeon International, had sufficient incriminating evidence against him, including the receipt of ₹3.19 crores from the complainant company between April 2022 and February 2024, allegedly by showing fake bills and without dispatching any material. The Court reasoned that given the substantial amount received without supply, custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be necessary to identify other individuals involved in the larger conspiracy. Furthermore, the Court acknowledged that forged and fabricated documents were involved in causing the financial loss. The Court also took into consideration that anticipatory bail petitions filed by similarly placed co-accused, Rameshwari Devi and Adita Singh, had already been dismissed by the same Court. The Court clarified that its observations were limited to the disposal of the bail application and not an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in light of the allegations of economic fraud and the evidence presented by the prosecution, particularly concerning his alleged involvement in raising fake invoices without supplying goods, as per Sections 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120B of the IPC (and corresponding BNS sections)? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the allegations are false and unbelievable. He argued that he was never an employee or authorized representative of the complainant company and had no access to its systems. He asserted that his firm, Burgeon International, is a legitimate, registered proprietorship with a GST number, a bank account, independent suppliers, purchase and sale invoices, statutory e-invoice records, and e-way bills. He claimed to have received goods through legal procedures and supplied them to the complainant, possessing corresponding statutory e-way bills. He argued that it was wrongly alleged that he caused financial loss without supplying goods. Respondent's arguments: The State, assisted by the complainant's counsel, opposed the bail. They argued that the petitioner is a main accused, specifically nominated in the FIR as the proprietor of Burgeon International and part of the larger conspiracy. They presented evidence including bank statements showing ₹3.19 crores received by the petitioner from the complainant between April 2022 and February 2024 based on fake bills without material supply. They also pointed to RTGS transactions of ₹26 lacs deposited by the petitioner in the complainant's account after the FIR registration, a co-accused's disclosure statement naming the petitioner, and the issuance of arrest warrants against him. The State emphasized that further investigation is crucial, custodial interrogation is required for recovery of forged documents, and the role of other vendors is yet to be unraveled.
Sections Cited
Section 482, Sections 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC, Sections 316(4), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of BNS
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
judgement/order
CRM-M-38736-2026 -2- registered at Police Station, Udyog Vihar, District Gurugram, Haryana,
The brief facts of the case, as mentioned in the impugned order are that Hitachi Astemo Gurugram Powertrain Systems Pvt. Ltd. ₹ was defrauded to the tune of about 12.767 crores through a well- hatched conspiracy by its two employees, Rohit Naithani (Executive, Accounts) and Vineet Jha (Senior Executive, Purchase), in connivance with several sham vendors. It is alleged that the said employees, being conversant with the procurement and payment systems of the company, fabricated purchase requests, purchase orders, clearance forms and forged signatures of approving authorities, and planted fake invoices into the SAP system by misusing the journal voucher booking method, which is ordinarily not meant for procurement. In this manner, funds were released to vendors such as Burgeon International, JMD Enterprises, Koncept Enterprises, Shivalik International, Shree Traders, Unique Impex, Shiva International, Virgo International, Swastik International and YVON Technologies Pvt. Ltd., even though no goods or services were ever supplied. The forensic investigation conducted by Nangia Anderson LLP revealed 376 fake invoices and 51 forged POs between January 2023 and March 2024, supported by editable invoice templates, blank quotations, and other forged material recovered from the laptops of the accused employees. The vendors were found to be non-existent at their stated addresses, many of them sharing common AMIT RANA 2026.08.05 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order
CRM-M-38736-2026 -3- phone numbers and GST irregularities, which pointed to their collusion in the fraud. Kickbacks were allegedly routed back to the employees by these vendors. When suspicion arose, the accused employees are stated to have destroyed evidence by deleting files and records from their systems. The systematic manipulation of the procurement and payment system caused wrongful loss to the complainant company and corresponding wrongful gain to the accused. The role of the accused is that he was the proprietor of Bergeon International Company had connived with the other accused persons in preparation of these forged bills and invoices without supplying the actual material.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that as per the case set up by the prosecution, Hitachi Astemo Gurugram Powertrain Systems Private Limited was defrauded to the tune of rupees 12.767 crores through a well-hashed conspiracy by its two employees, namely, Rohit Naithani (Executive, Accounts), and Vineet Jha (Senior Executive, Purchase), in connivance with several sham vendors. As the said employees were conversant with the procurement and payment systems of the company, they had fabricated purchase requests, purchase orders, clearance forms, and forged signatures of approving authorities and planted fake invoices into the SAP system by misusing the journal voucher booking method, which is not meant for procurement. The complainant also alleged that the petitioner, being proprietor of M/s Burgeon AMIT RANA 2026.08.05 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order
CRM-M-38736-2026 -4- International, had also allegedly acted in connivance with the accused employees of the complainant and raised invoices without actual supply of corresponding goods. However, the said allegations are palpably false and unbelievable. First of all, the petitioner was never acted as an employee, clerk, servant, officer, consultant or authorized representative of the complainant company, nor had any access or physical control over the systems of the company of the complainant. Still further, M/s Burgeon International is a duly registered proprietorship concern bearing a GST number since 02.03.2022, has a current bank account, identifiable third-party suppliers, purchase invoices, sale invoices, statutory e-invoice records and e-way bills. Apart from that, the petitioner possesses an independent procurement trial from GST registered third-party suppliers including Axis Organics Private Limited, Nuplanet Ventures India Private Limited and other independent business concerns. Apart from that, the complete purchase side documents issued in favour of M/s Burgeon International were annexed as Annexure P-3. Even, the firm of the petitioner receives goods through a legal procedure and has supplied the goods to the complainant company and the petitioner possesses corresponding statutory e-way bills in this regard. M/s Burgeon International had issued sale invoices for the products dispatched to the complainant company and the dispatch and movement particulars recorded therein are capable of verification from GST portal, concerned vehicle or transporter of the complainant company. Thus, it AMIT RANA 2026.08.05 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order
CRM-M-38736-2026 -5- has been wrongly alleged that the petitioner had caused any financial loss to the complainant company without supplying the goods.
On the other hand, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is also one of the main accused in the present case. He has been specifically nominated as an accused in the FIR itself being the proprietor of M/s Burgeon International and is a part of larger conspiracy hatched by Vineet Jha, main accused. There are sufficient oral as well as documentary evidence against him including bank statement of account of Mridul Gupta vide no. 18450200003371 with Fedral Bank Gurugram indicating receipt of Rs.3,19,24,494/- from the account of Hitachi Company from the period 05.04.2022 to 15.02.2024 on the basis of fake bills and without sending/receipt of any corresponding material. It has come on record of this case that the petitioner had deposited a part of the defrauded amount of RTGS transactions of Rs 26 lacs in 4 installments of Rs. 4 lacs, 5 lacs, 2 lacs and 15 lacs dated 04.08.2025, 18.07.2025, 23.08.2025 and 11.07.2025 respectively in the Account number 00012892 of the complainant's company with MUFG Bank Limited, Aerocity, New Delhi after registration of this case which establishes the admission of the guilt on the part of the petitioner. The name of the petitioner is also reflected in the disclosure statement of accused Vineet Jha during his police custody on 03.06.2026. Arrest warrants against the accused AMIT RANA 2026.08.05 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order
CRM-M-38736-2026 -6- petitioner Mridul Gupta were issued from the trial Court on 29.05.2026 and further extended on 15.06.2026 up to 07.08.2026. Learned State counsel further submits that further investigation is at a very crucial stage and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is still required to recover the documents which were forged and fabricated by him. The fake invoices prepared by the petitioner are yet to be recovered and the role of many other vendors involved in larger conspiracy is yet to be unraveled.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.
In the present case, the present petitioner, along with other co-accused, is involved in a serious economic fraud of Rs. 12.76 crores. He is admittedly the sole proprietor of M/s Burgeon International, and sufficient incriminating evidence has been collected against him to prove that he had received a sum of Rs. 3.19 crores from the account of the complainant company from the period 05.04.2022 to 15.02.2024, by showing fake and fabricating bills and without dispatching any material to the complainant company. Still further, when a substantial amount has been deposited in the account of M/s Burgeon International, without any supply of documents, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required to know the names of other persons also, who may be part of a larger conspiracy. Apart from that, even sufficient documents were forged and fabricated by the petitioner and his co-accused in the process of causing such a AMIT RANA 2026.08.05 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order
CRM-M-38736-2026 -7- huge financial loss to the complainant. Apart from that, the anticipatory bail petitions filed by similarly placed co-accused Rameshwari Devi and Adita Singh have already been dismissed by this Court on 09.07.2026 passed in CRM-M-34684 of 2026 and CRM M-23571 of 2026. 7. Thus, finding no merit, the present petition is ordered to be dismissed.
It is made clear that the observations have been made in the present order only for the limited purpose of disposal of the present bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the mergits of the case. 03.08.2026
(N.S.SHEKHAWAT) amit rana JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No AMIT RANA 2026.08.05 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.