Mumbai: The Hrithik Roshan –Kangana Ranaut legal battle which began last year is getting murkier by the day. Just when we thought that the dust had settled and the infamous spat had ended for good, Kangana made shocking revelations about her turbulent past while promoting her film Simran a few weeks back.
The actress who hails from Himachal had made explosive statements against Hrithik Roshan and Aditya Pancholi during interviews while promoting her film. While Hrithik chose to maintain stoic silence, Pancholi hit back at Kangana. Reports even suggested that Pancholi and his wife had filed a defamation case against her.
And now there’s a new twist to the tale involving Hrithik Roshan.
According to a report in dnaindia.com, originally attributed to Republic, a copy of the 29-page complaint filed by Roshan’s advocate Mahesh Jethmalani has surfaced.
The complaint alleges that Kangana was ‘delusional’ about her relationship with Hrithik and referred to him as her ‘eternal lover’. It also alleged that Kangana had been ‘trying to lure’ Hrithik into ’emotional and physical relationship’ saying that she had ‘travelled millions of years for Hrithik’.
According to dnaindia.com report, Kangana’s lawyer Mr Rizwaan Siddiqui has issued a statement to after a copy of Hrithik’s complaint reportedly filed on April 8, 2017, was made public.
The statement reads: “It is quite surprising to note that some electronic news channel is trying to create a media feeding frenzy, concerning an old police complaint which was filed by Mr. Hrithik Roshan sometime early in the year 2016, to miserably create a fresh story and get TRPs for their channel. Be as it may, I want to clarify to other electronic media channels and other print publications that the said old police complaint concerning an imposter, which was filed by Mr. Hrithik Roshan has been dealt with by my client, as per the legal procedure provided. Also, all others should not get confused by the random and out of context questions that may be miserably raised by the channel for obvious reasons. All answers to the questions are available on public platform since early 2016 and it is not prudent on the part of my client to repeat the same things all over again. If Mr. Hrithik really wants to clear his name then he has to simply answer the questions which were publicly put to him at that stage. The said unanswered questions are also available on public domain since April 2016.”
Bureau Report
Leave a Reply