Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Bail In ₹5.44 Crore Roselyn Square Case, Says Allegations Go Beyond Delay

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on 16 July held that allegations of cheating, forgery, criminal breach of trust and conspiracy in connection with a real estate project go beyond a simple dispute over delayed possession or non-payment of assured returns.

Justice Virinder Aggarwal dismissed the regular bail plea of Bhupinder Singla, Director of Robus Landcorp Pvt. Ltd., who was accused in the “Roselyn Square” commercial project case, noting that the investigating agency had collected prima facie material, including electronic chat communications allegedly acknowledging cash payments, whose evidentiary value would be examined during trial. He held:

“This is not a simpliciter case of delayed delivery of possession or non-payment of assured returns by a developer, for which the complainant could have availed the statutory remedy under Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Rather, the allegations prima facie disclose commission of serious offences involving fabrication and alteration of documents, cheating, criminal breach of trust and conspiracy.”

The case arose from a complaint by investor Ashok Kumar Loomba against Rosy Singla, stated to be Promoter and Managing Director of Roselyn Square, Bhupinder Singla, Director of Robus Landcorp Pvt. Ltd., real estate agent Rakesh Kataria, sales manager Sumit Sharma and the promoting company.

Loomba and co-investor Anil Kumar Syal alleged that they were induced to invest in three commercial units in the project on assurances of 15% annual returns, payable quarterly in advance until possession, and lease rentals after possession. The units were allegedly promised in fully furnished condition by 1 January 2024.

The investors allegedly paid Rs. 1.19 crore for Unit No. 121 and Rs. 2.125 crore each for Units Nos. 123 and 124, apart from Rs. 8.38 lakh towards Goods and Services Tax (GST), taking the total investment to approximately Rs. 5.44 crore.

They alleged that despite paying the consideration, the accused failed to deliver possession and later stopped the assured returns. The outstanding assured returns were stated to be about Rs. 1.43 crore as of June 2025.

Following a preliminary inquiry, the police registered an FIR on 4 May 2026 at Police Station Zirakpur. The police arrested Bhupinder Singla on 6 May 2026. He subsequently approached the High Court under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail.

Singla argued that the dispute was essentially commercial and that the project was registered under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA). He also pointed to statutory approvals, including an Occupancy Certificate dated 21 July 2023. He further contended that only about Rs. 1.53 crore had been received through banking channels and that further custodial detention was unnecessary.

The State of Punjab and the complainant opposed the bail plea, alleging a systematic financial fraud involving cash payments and manipulation of documents. They also pointed out that co-accused Rosy Singla remained absconding and was allegedly concealing incriminating material and proceeds of crime.

The Court noted that the allegations were not confined to delayed possession or non-payment of assured returns and that the investigating agency had collected prima facie electronic material allegedly corroborating cash receipts. It further observed:

“Having regard to the gravity and nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the role attributed to the petitioner, the abscondence of the co-accused, and the material collected by the investigating agency, this Court is satisfied that no case is made out for extending the concession of regular bail.”

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed Singla's regular bail plea, taking into account the gravity of the allegations, the stage of investigation, his alleged role and the abscondence of the co-accused.

Appearances for petitioner (Bhupinder Singla): Senior Advocate Randeep Singh Rai with Advocates Karan Pathak and Radhika Mehta.

Appearances for respondent (State of Punjab): Assistant Advocate General Navreet Kaur.

Appearance for complainant (Ashok Kumar Loomba): Advocate Sandeep Singh Majithia.