Actor Rajpal Yadav has been in the news after he embroiled in a major legal controversy after being sent to Tihar Jail in connection with a Rs 9 crore cheque bounce case. The actor was out on bail but the matter was still in court. According to the latest update, the Delhi High Court on April 2 reserved its verdict after multiple attempts to reach a settlement failed, despite sustained judicial intervention. During the hearing, the actor also made an emotional plea before the court.The matter was heard by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma according to ANI, who expressed dissatisfaction over the actor’s inconsistent stance on repaying the dues. The judge remarked, “I am not getting my answers. The undertaking said something else, and now you are saying something else.”
Representing the complainant, advocate Avneet Singh Sikka argued that the actor had already accepted his conviction and could not now avoid liability. He pointed out that a revision petition filed in 2024 came with an unexplained delay of 1894 days and lacked sufficient justification for condonation. He further said that completing a sentence does not eliminate financial responsibility. Sikka added that despite repeated assurances, the dues remained unpaid, leaving the complainant with no choice but to proceed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.Throughout the proceedings, the court made several efforts to broker a settlement between the parties. At one point, the complainant agreed to accept Rs 6 crore as a full and final settlement.However, in an emotional response, Rajpal rejected the offer, stating that he had already faced significant financial hardship. Appearing virtually, he told the court that he had sold five flats and paid a considerable amount already. He stated, “I am not emotional… send me to jail five more times.”In a bid to resolve the impasse, the court also suggested a structured payment plan of ₹3 crore within a stipulated timeline, clarifying that it was only a judicial proposal and not a binding agreement. Even this effort failed to yield consensus. The court also criticised the conduct of the proceedings, cautioning, “Never think the judge weak if the judge is nice to you,” while noting that valuable judicial time was being wasted.With no agreement reached and differences persisting, the court ultimately reserved its judgment.The origins of the case date back to 2010, when Rajpal Yadav borrowed ₹5 crore from Delhi-based Murali Projects Pvt Ltd to finance his directorial venture Ata Pata Laapata (2012). The film’s poor box office performance resulted in heavy losses, eventually leading to a financial dispute. In 2018, a magisterial court convicted the actor under the Negotiable Instruments Act for cheque dishonour, sentencing him to six months in prison—a ruling later upheld by a sessions court in 2019. Over time, the outstanding amount escalated to nearly ₹9 crore.Rajpal was later granted interim bail and released from jail on February 16. The Delhi High Court extended interim bail until March 18, with conditions set by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, including a ₹1 lakh bail bond and one surety. Earlier, the court had directed him to deposit ₹1.5 crore by 3 PM to secure interim relief. After the complainant’s counsel, representing M/S Murli Project, confirmed that the amount had been credited to the company’s bank account against the bounced cheque, bail was granted.
