'Film was not what I shot': Govind Namdev's claim draws sharp response from Kala Hiran producer

The controversy around Kala Hiran has taken a fresh turn after producer Amit Jani issued a legal warning to veteran actor Govind Namdev. The producer has demanded a public apology from the actor within seven days and has also sought Rs. 50 lakh as compensation.

Kala Hiran, inspired by the 1998 blackbuck poaching case involving Salman Khan, has remained in the spotlight since its announcement. While the film does not directly use the superstar's name, its teaser features a character named Ayaan Khan, who bears a resemblance to Salman. Govind Namdev is also a part of the film's cast.

The latest dispute began after Namdev, during a recent interview, expressed surprise over the film's trailer. The actor stated that what appeared in the promotional material was very different from the project he remembered working on. His remarks quickly gained attention online.

Responding to the comments, Amit Jani took to social media and revealed that a legal notice had been sent to the veteran actor. In his post, Jani wrote, "Govind Namdev ko legal notice diya. 7 din mein sarvajanik maafi maange aur production house ko 50 lakh rupaya jurmana de; anyatha kanooni karyavahi hogi."

The producer also shared a video message in which he criticised Namdev's statements. During the video, Jani further claimed that the actor was associated not only with Kala Hiran but had also signed its sequel. However, no response from Namdev regarding the legal notice has been made public so far.

Meanwhile, the film has already witnessed another controversy. Actor Sonu Mishra recently disclosed that he was initially selected to portray the character reportedly inspired by Salman Khan. However, he decided to leave the project after participating in the shoot for two days.

Explaining his decision, Mishra said, "I left because I had not signed the agreement. We shot for two days, and I asked them for the agreement and script because they were making a one-sided narrative story against a superstar."

He further added, "So, they understood I was not going to fall into their trap. I asked for the agreement to know what all clauses are there in it. After a long time, they showed me things, and it was revealed that I had to speak negatively against the star in the media. So, all these things were against my ethics."