Cheque Bounce
Subject : Legal
EXCLUSIVE: Despite the jail sentence, Rajkumar Santoshi has not gone behind bars and can file an appeal; lawyer of the complainant shares details; Santoshi’s lawyer releases statement
The complainant, Ashok Lal, a resident of Jamnagar and the owner of Shreeji Shipping, had loaned Rajkumar Santoshi Rs. 1.10 crore in 2015 for a film. To repay the loan, Rajkumar gave Ashok Lal 11 cheques of Rs. 10 lakhs each. These cheques bounced in December 2016.
The complainant at first tried to establish contact with the filmmaker over this matter. When he failed to do so, Ashok Lal filed the suit under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Bollywood Hungama exclusively spoke to Piyush Bhojani, the advocate for Ashok Lal. Piyush confirmed that Rajkumar Santoshi was not present during the hearing on February 17. He also explained, “The maximum imprisonment in such negotiable cases is two years and the maximum fine is double the amount owed. Once the judgment is announced, the accused gets a period of 30 days to file an appeal. After filing the appeal, he has to deposit 20% of the amount. In other words, he’s bound to deposit Rs. 22 lakhs. If he fails to do so, he’ll be imprisoned.” He continued, “If we win after he files the appeal, he’ll go to the High Court where again, he’ll have to deposit 20% of the amount.”
Piyush Bhojani also revealed that this was not the first case against Rajkumar Santoshi by the complainant, “Three cases were also filed against him in 2014.” When asked how both parties met, he replied, “Mr Ashok Lal is a businessman. He also has an office and residence in Mumbai. They met and became friends. In the past, Mr Santoshi had taken the loan several times but he had always returned the amount within the stipulated time. This time, however, he defaulted.”
Rajkumar Santoshi even skipped hearings several times. In April 2023, he had to attend the hearing after a bailable warrant was issued against him. Piyush Bhojani stated, “He came for the hearings twice. He had to come when the case was filed in 2017. It's mandatory. Then he attended a hearing last year. This time probably, he was aware that he’d be punished. Hence, he skipped attending the hearing. But now, he’ll have to attend to file the appeal. It can’t be done without his presence.”
The chances of Rajkumar Santoshi going behind bars are unlikely, said the lawyer, “Very few people go to jail in such cases.” He added, “Mr Ashok Lal is ultra-rich and has his own private jet. The amount was not a significant one for him. But this case was important for us so that a message is sent loud and clear to everyone that if they try to run away with his money, he/she will be punished.”
Meanwhile, Rajkumar Santoshi's advocate, Binesh Patel, released a statement, “First of all, the court has stayed its judgement for 30 days and has granted Mr Santoshi bail after we sought time to appeal against the judgement at a higher forum. The prosecution didn't produce any documentary evidence to prove that Mr Santoshi had taken money at all. The prosecution itself has admitted that a third party had collected the said money from the complainant. In return, the third party had provided altered eleven cheques of Rs.10 lakhs each, which Mr Santoshi was not aware of. The magisterial court overlooked these facts and ruled against us. Therefore, on the grounds of invalid and false claims, alterations happened in the cheques. The fact is that the complainants do not want to present or call in the said third party who had collected the money, about whom Mr Santoshi does not know. So, we shall appeal at a higher forum with the above-highlighted points and even more.”
Also Read: Rajkumar Santoshi opens up about cheque bouncing case; says, “Easily solvable. My lawyers are on it”
BOLLYWOOD NEWS - LIVE UPDATES
Catch us for latest Bollywood News, New Bollywood Movies update, Box office collection, New Movies Release , Bollywood News Hindi, Entertainment News, Bollywood Live News Today & Upcoming Movies 2024 and stay updated with latest hindi movies only on Bollywood Hungama.
Cheque Bounce Case - Filmmaker Sentenced - Legal Appeal - Negotiable Instruments Act - Jail Sentence Stayed - Documentary Evidence - Third Party Involvement - Altered Cheques - Magisterial Court Overlooked Facts - Invalid and False Claims - Complainants Unwilling to Present Third Party - Appeal to Higher Forum
#ChequeBounceCase #FilmmakerSentenced #LegalAppeal
Vague 'Bad Work' Can't Presume Penetrative Sexual Assault Under POCSO Section 4 Without Evidence: Patna High Court
28 Apr 2026
Limiting Crop Damage Compensation to Specific Wild Animals Excluding Birds Violates Article 14: Bombay HC
28 Apr 2026
Appeal Limitation in 1991 Police Rules Yields to Uttarakhand Police Act 2007 on Inconsistency: Uttarakhand HC
28 Apr 2026
Nashik Court Reserves Verdict on Khan's TCS Bail Plea
29 Apr 2026
Delhi Court Grants Bail to I-PAC Director in PMLA Case
30 Apr 2026
No Historic Record of Saraswati Temple Demolition, Muslim Body Tells MP High Court in Bhojshala Dispute
30 Apr 2026
No Absolute Bar on Simultaneous Parole/Furlough for Co-Accused Under Delhi Prisons Rules: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 2026
Rejection of Jurisdiction Plea under Section 16 Arbitration Act Not Challengeable under Section 34 Till Final Award: Supreme Court
30 Apr 2026
'Living Separately' Under Section 13B HMA Means Cessation Of Marital Obligations, Regardless Of Residence: Patna High Court
30 Apr 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.