|
The Delhi High Court has disposed of a plea filed by Kumar Mangat Pathak, Director of M/s Panorama Studios, seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him concerning the financial fraud case related to the overseas rights of the Ajay Devgn film 'Drishyam 2'.
The case concerns allegations of a Rs 4.3 crore fraud involving the Chinese-language distribution rights of the film across China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. The FIR, which was filed in June 2025, accuses Pathak, Bharat Sevak, and others of conspiracy, document forgery, and misrepresentation of rights. Pathak approached the court to quash the FIR registered by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), contending that the matter was purely commercial in nature and had been wrongly criminalized. His counsel argued that he had already cooperated with the investigation and was exploring parallel legal remedies. Justice Neena Krishna Bansal refused to keep the petition pending or grant any interim protection, observing that the investigation is still in its early stages. The court noted that since the petitioner had already joined the probe, no interference was warranted at this point. The complaint was filed by a Delhi-based businessman who alleged he was misled into investing Rs 4.3 crore based on forged documents. He claimed he was promised exclusive Chinese distribution rights for Drishyam 2 through a deal presented by Bharat Sevak, who introduced himself as an authorized representative of Panorama Studios and a partner at Terra Bento Mines & Minerals. Sevak allegedly produced a term sheet and facilitated meetings with key members of the production house, including Kumar Mangat Pathak. According to the complaint, the businessman was also promised a share in the sales revenue. While Sevak claimed to have transferred Rs 15.75 crore out of a total transaction value of Rs 16.40 crore, Panorama Studios has denied receiving the funds and alleged that the money was deposited into an unrelated account. In response, Pathak submitted evidence stating that any authorization given to Sevak was limited and had expired well before the alleged agreement. The petition to quash the FIR included legal citations and a public notice issued by Panorama Studios, warning third parties against unauthorized claims made by Sevak. (ANI)
|
