Rakesh Roshan's 2011 nightmare ends – Bombay High Court orders return of 20 lakh

Reportedly, Bombay High Court Rakesh Roshan ordered the return of 20 lakhs that were duped from Rakesh Roshan.

Team India Forums

Team India Forums

View Profile
Rakesh Roshan

Bollywood filmmaker Rakesh Roshan, known for his string of successful films, found himself entangled in a financial scam back in 2011. Recently, the Bombay High Court intervened, directing the return of 20 lakhs out of the 50 lakhs swindled from the acclaimed director.

In 2011, Rakesh Roshan fell victim to a scam orchestrated by two individuals posing as CBI officers. These impostors duped the filmmaker of 50 lakhs, and the payment was made on June 13, 2011. However, after the transaction, Roshan received no further communication, raising suspicions about the legitimacy of the CBI officers.

Taking swift action, Roshan filed a written complaint with the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) in Mumbai. The ACB later apprehended the culprits, identified as Ashwini Sharma from Haryana and Rajesh Ranjan from Mumbai, who confessed to similarly defrauding other film stars.

The authorities seized properties owned by the fraudsters in Navi Mumbai, Haryana, and Dalhousie, totaling around Rs 2.94 crores. Additionally, gold was confiscated during the operation. 

In 2012, Roshan filed an application with the trial court to reclaim his money. In 2014, the trial court granted him the retrieval of Rs 30 lakhs but withheld the remaining Rs 20 lakhs.

Expressing dissatisfaction with the court's decision, Roshan sought recourse through the high court, represented by his lawyer Prasanna Bhangale. Bhangale argued, based on CBI findings, that one accused took 20 lakhs, and the other took 30 lakhs out of the total 50 lakhs. The accused who took 20 lakhs had already given no objection for Roshan to receive the money, yet the trial court only sanctioned 30 lakhs.

In a decisive move, the Bombay High Court, in its recent order, declared that the entire sum should be returned to the filmmaker, emphasizing that there is no justifiable reason to withhold the remaining amount. 

Your reaction

Rakesh Roshan Thumbnail

Rakesh Roshan

Comments (0)

Latest Stories