Haldar has denied all allegations, calling the action a “planned criminal conspiracy” and investor interference. He said he has filed an FIR ( first information report)in Kolkata and will pursue arbitration. He was removed from the CEO position on February 2, 2025.
Hornet works with multiple government agencies, including the Enforcement Directorate, Telangana Police and West Bengal Police, providing real-time blockchain tracing and dark web monitoring tools.
According to startup data collection platform Tracxn, Hornet has raised Rs 4 crore in seed funding from Artha Venture Fund in February last year. Earlier, it secured $29,900 from Pontaq and Nextgen Technology Fund in March 2024, after receiving a $12,000 grant from the Indian Statistical Institute. Artha currently holds about 8% equity in the company and has disbursed Rs 2 crore.
Founded by 25-year-old Haldar and Subhrojyoti Mandal, with Haldar serving as CEO and Mandal as COO, the company’s website no longer mentions Haldar.
Investor allegations
Anirudh Damani, managing partner at Artha Venture Fund, told ET that investors were forced to act after discovering that Haldar had taken up external employment with a client while continuing as CEO of Hornet, allegedly drawing Rs 2 lakh per month in violation of the shareholders’ agreement.
“He was using company assets to get paid personally,” Damani said.
Artha Venture has backed companies like spacetech startup AgniKul Cosmos, mobility fleet management firm Everest Fleet, and peer-to-peer lending startup LenDenClub,
Damani alleged that Haldar used company funds for personal expenses, including Amazon purchases such as groceries and whey protein. Initial estimates suggest the amount involved could run into tens of lakhs, he said.
He further alleged that Haldar appointed his father as an internal accountant and paid him from company funds despite the presence of an external accounting firm. The father was also provided a company laptop.
Damani said the father was appointed without taking prior approval from investors or revealing that he was hiring a related party.
Damani claimed that intellectual property and government-linked investigations were compromised. “Haldar copied the company’s entire codebase onto a personal hard drive. This included data connected to ongoing investigations being conducted by law enforcement agencies using Hornet’s platform,” he said.
According to Damani, investors discovered the external engagement in June 2025, which became clearer by July. “That part could have been fixable. But instead of correcting it, things escalated,” he said.
Damani also alleged that Haldar moved funds from the company’s bank account, restricted access for the cofounder and other stakeholders, and added himself as a beneficiary to other accounts.
Founder denies wrongdoing
Haldar has categorically denied the allegations.
“I am really depressed about it. All these allegations are false. Nothing like that has really happened,” he told ET. He currently holds about 67% stake in the startup.
Haldar alleged that investors were interfering in day-to-day operations and hampering growth.
“They stopped us from launching an app for end users, delayed hiring a salesperson and blocked server purchases needed for proof-of-concept work with central agencies. When I protested, they started putting allegations on me,” he said.
On the charge of external employment, Haldar said the engagement was on behalf of the company and not in his personal capacity.
“It was for the company. A representative was needed. The money was supposed to go to the company’s bank account. It never came to my account,” he said, adding that he was willing to provide bank statements.
He also rejected allegations of data theft. “If I take my laptop home, does that mean I am copying data? It is a backup of information. Not critical information. We never store critical information or personally identifiable information (PII),” he said.
On the board action, Haldar claimed he was removed through an improperly convened meeting. He said he was given only 10 minutes’ notice for an extraordinary general meeting, instead of the 21 days required under the Companies Act.
“It is not possible to remove a director like that. I have filed an FIR on February 4 and will proceed legally,” he said.
