Actor Rajpal Yadav once again found himself under pressure in a long-running loan case as the Supreme Court expressed strong displeasure over his failure to comply with its earlier directions. The court criticised what it described as his “arrogance” and made it clear that it was running out of patience with the actor.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana was hearing the matter. The court said that its September 15 order directing Yadav to deposit ₹2 crore had not been followed.
The bench, however, decided to give him one final opportunity and extended the deadline. The matter will now be heard on October 7.
Rajpal Yadav’s Lawyer Shows Four Demand Drafts
During the hearing, Yadav’s lawyer produced a photocopy of four demand drafts, each worth ₹50 lakh. The lawyer told the court that the drafts had been issued in Maharashtra and were being brought to Delhi.
However, the lender’s lawyer questioned whether the photocopies could be relied upon. Senior advocate Ajit Kumar Sinha, appearing for the lender firm, pointed out that Yadav is an actor and suggested that the court should not simply rely on photocopies.
He raised the possibility that the four photocopies could potentially represent copies of the same ₹50 lakh document.
The court took note of the situation and expressed its frustration with the way the matter was being handled.
Supreme Court Says It Wants the Lender to Get Its Money
During the hearing, the bench made particularly strong observations about the case. The judges indicated that they had little sympathy for Yadav’s repeated defaults.
The court said it could ignore how the actor was treating the proceedings but made it clear that its priority was ensuring that the lender received at least some of the money it was owed.
The bench also pointed out that Yadav had been given 15 days from the September 15 order to make the payment, but that period had already expired.
The court noted that Yadav was already seven days late and had not even filed an application seeking additional time.
Court Also Raises Passport Issue
The lender’s lawyer further informed the Supreme Court that Rajpal Yadav had not deposited his passport, despite being directed to do so within two days of the September 15 order.
The court took exception to this as well and said that such conduct needed to be addressed.
The judges had previously given Yadav an opportunity to comply with the payment directions, but his failure to do so added to the court’s concerns.
What Is the ₹5 Crore Loan Case About?
The case goes back to 2010, when Rajpal Yadav borrowed ₹5 crore from M/s Murli Projects Limited to produce his film Ata Pata Lapata.
According to the case, Yadav had committed to repay ₹8 crore but failed to honour the repayment agreement. The lender subsequently initiated criminal proceedings against him.
The case eventually resulted in Yadav’s conviction and a three-month prison sentence in May 2024.
Yadav later approached the Delhi High Court seeking release on probation. However, on July 10, the High Court upheld the imprisonment after noting that he had been given several opportunities to honour his repayment commitments.
Yadav and His Wife Had Already Paid ₹2.25 Crore
The Delhi High Court had also taken note of payments made by Yadav and his wife during the legal proceedings.
The court observed that they had collectively paid ₹2.25 crore to the complainant. A portion of this amount was directed to be adjusted against the money payable in seven cases.
Rajpal Yadav’s wife was also directed to make separate payments of ₹5.51 lakh in each of the seven cases.
Despite these payments, the larger dispute remained unresolved, leading to continued proceedings.
Supreme Court Extends Surrender Deadline
The Supreme Court had previously extended Rajpal Yadav’s surrender deadline until October 5, after the original date set by the High Court had expired.
Now, with the latest hearing, the deadline has effectively been extended again until October 7.
The Supreme Court will consider Yadav’s response and the payment situation on that date before deciding what happens next.
For now, the actor has been given another opportunity to comply with the court’s directions. But the strong observations from the bench make it clear that the court expects the matter to be resolved without any further delay.
