How an incident involving Amitabh Bachchan brought an UNEXPECTED TWIST in Rajpal Yadav’s cheque bounce case

Bollywood actor Rajpal Yadav secured interim bail from the Delhi High Court and was released from Tihar Jail after submitting ?1.5 crore in a cheque bounce case filed by businessman Madhav Gopal Aggarwal. According to Rajpal's lawyer, Bhaskar Upadhyay, the dispute originated from a loan of ?5 crore taken by Rajpal for his film "Ata Pata Laapata" in 2010. The loan led to a settlement of ?10.40 crore, but the issued cheques were dishonoured, resulting in a court case.

A Hindustan Times report further detailed that the two parties had initially established an agreement, which was subsequently amended through three supplementary agreements, the last one finalized in August 2012. As per the final agreement, Rajpal Yadav provided five cheques to the businessman, intended to be cashed beginning in December 2012.

How Amitabh Bachchan’s music launch video turned out to be life changing for Rajpal Yadav

The situation, however, reportedly took a turn during the film's music launch in September 2012, an event attended by megastar Amitabh Bachchan.

In September, Amitabh Bachchan stepped in for the film’s music launch and the complainant wanted to share the stage with him. Rajpal’s team said no to that as Mr Bachchan wasn’t taking any favours for his presence, and the complainant got annoyed by that. He moved to the Delhi HC in September 2012 on the basis of that agreement, asking for a stay on the film until his dues were cleared. The case was dragged till December 2012 when he deposited the first cheque of Rs 60,60,350 which was honoured, Bhaskar shares.

Bhaskar on the fresh consent passed

The lawyer further stated that the complainant later filed an undertaking to lift the stay on the film. In 2013, both sides entered into a consent agreement, which nullified all previous agreements. Bhaskar added that in 2016, a fresh consent decree was passed. A fresh consent decree was passed in 2016 and as per law it is unchallengeable by either parties. The amount of Rs 10.40 crore was due as per that. The complainant signed an undertaking that previous agreements will not be revived if the said amount is returned to them. The HC also said that the recovery of this money should only be done by way of execution, he shares.

Following this, an execution petition was filed in 2016, leading to a payment of Rs 1.90 crore to the complainant. For the outstanding amount, another guarantor, Mr. Anant Dattaram, offered to provide surety, with relevant documents purportedly available to the publication. However, the complainant allegedly rejected this surety.

He offered his property valued at Rs 15 crore as surety for him, asking for one month's time to return the amount. Surprisingly, the complainant refused to take this and asked for Rajpal ji’s imprisonment for the satisfaction of the decree. The execution stated this in writing and added that since no other mode of execution is suggested, the execution was closed, Bhaskar shares.

How legal proceedings took an unexpected turn

The legal proceedings took a new direction in 2018. The lawyer explained that while the execution was underway, the complainant brought back cheques from the third supplementary agreement, which was supposed to be invalid after the consent agreement.

In March 2018, the trial court found Rajpal guilty and fined him Rs 11.5 crore. Subsequently, in November of the same year, the execution court sentenced him to three months in jail for what Bhaskar indicated was the same basis for the legal action.

Rajpal Yadav’s team’s requests to the court

In 2019, Rajpal's legal team contested the order. However, according to Bhaskar, a change in legal representation created difficulties. The new judge stated they found no merit in the case, and Rajpal ji's counsel acknowledged they were prepared to pay the amount if given a chance for mediation. The court documented this in its observations, Bhaskar shared.

He further noted that, due to this turn of events, the case is still ongoing. The latest information indicates that Rajpal's team has asked the court to thoroughly consider their arguments and make a decision based on the merits of the case.