The case was initially filed against real estate firms Rudra Buildwell Realty Pvt. Ltd, H R Infracity Pvt Ltd, U M Architectures and Contractors Ltd, and Gambhir, who served as director and brand ambassador for the companies' joint venture. The judge highlighted that Gambhir was the sole accused to have a "direct interface with the investors" due to his brand ambassador role, but noted the magisterial court’s order had not accounted for his financial transactions with Rudra Buildwell Realty Pvt. Ltd, specifically his payment of Rs 6 crore and receipt of Rs 48.5 million from the company.

The chargesheet, Judge Gogne observed, did not clarify whether the payments received by Gambhir had any link to funds from investors. Given that the allegations primarily concerned cheating, both the chargesheet and the prior court order should have examined whether any misappropriated funds were directed to Gambhir.

Additionally, the court noted Gambhir’s extended financial dealings with the company, as he was an additional director from 29 June 2011 to 1 October 2013, which coincided with the period the project was promoted. Although most repayments to him were made after he resigned from the post, the judge found the magisterial court’s findings to be overly broad, combining observations about Gambhir with those regarding other unnamed accused. Consequently, the case was remanded to the magisterial court with instructions to issue a comprehensive fresh order, detailing specific allegations against each accused in relation to the offences and chargesheet evidence.

The accused reportedly promoted a housing project, initially named "Serra Bella" in Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, which was later rebranded as "Pavo Real" in 2013. The prosecution contended that complainants had booked flats, making payments between Rs 6 lakh and Rs 16 lakh after being persuaded by promotional materials. However, no substantial development occurred on the land, which remained undeveloped until 2016. Complainants later discovered that the project was neither constructed according to the advertised plans nor approved by relevant state authorities. Furthermore, they learned the land was under litigation, with a stay order imposed by the Allahabad High Court on its possession since 2003.