1. You Are At:
  2. Home
  3. Entertainment News
  4. Bollywood News
  5. No more tight-lipped: Hrithik names Kangana in FIR, her lawyer says no one has right to summon the ‘Queen’

No more tight-lipped: Hrithik names Kangana in FIR, her lawyer says no one has right to summon the ‘Queen’

New Delhi: Legal tussles between celebs have never ended amicable and the latest one between actors Hrithik Roshan and Kangana Ranaut too won’t, it seems. The two rumoured ex flames have dug deep graves for

India TV Entertainment Desk [ Updated: March 31, 2016 20:18 IST ]
Kangana Ranaut and Hrithik Roshan
Kangana Ranaut and Hrithik Roshan

New Delhi: Legal tussles between celebs have never ended amicable and the latest one between actors Hrithik Roshan and Kangana Ranaut too won’t, it seems. The two rumoured ex flames have dug deep graves for each other by slapping one another with legal notices.

The latest twist in the already high on controversy tale is, that Hrithik Roshan has broken his ‘dignified silence’, which he claimed to keep since years, and has named Kangana in an FIR he filed with the cyber crime cell of police.

On Friday, Hrithik who had till now refrained from using Kangana’s name in his complaints, mentioned her name. In his complaint, Hrithik has alleged that an impersonator has been exchanging mails with Kangana.

Following his complaint, in the police station of Bandra Kurla Complex, the police have send summons to Kangana. The national award winning actress and her sister Rangoli, who is privy to the content of the emails exchanged, have seven days to appear at the police station.

A source from cyber police told a leading daily,

“An FIR is filed under Section 66 (C, D) of IT Act and Section 419 of IPC. We have attached Hrithik's statement in the FIR. Thousands of mails have been exchanged between her and the said e-mail [ID]. Kangana's sister is a witness to the incident. So, her statement is important, too. Hrithik has claimed it is not his e-mail ID and an impostor was using it, while Kangana said it is Hrithik who was operating the said mail.”

Also Read: Hrithik Roshan might be in grave legal trouble but his fans still love him. Here’s proof

In the year 2014, Hrithik had filed a similar complaint but did not mention Kangana’s name as he wanted her to stay away from scrutiny. The mails contain intimate videos and chats. Hrithik, in his earlier complaint, had said that his fan had been sending mails to the alleged impostor. In his legal notice, he threatened to leak all information if she did not apologise.

In his FIR, Hrithik has mentioned that the entire saga started on May 24, 2014 at the birthday party of director Karan Johar. That evening, Kangana went upto Hirthik and thanked him for appreciating her role in ‘Queen’. Hrithik, however, said he did not watch the movie. In December that same year, Hrithik laimed he has a personal e-mail ID, which is hroshan@imac.com and he usually interacts with his friends and fans on this, while Kangana was having a conversation on hroshan@email.com.

Kangana claims it was Hrithik speaking to her on the e-mail ID.

Also Read: Legal Trouble Again! Hrithik Roshan gets notice for hurting Christian sentiments with his ‘pope’ tweet about Kangana

Kangana’s lawyer Rizwan Siddiquee in reply to the summons has said that

"No Police Officer can summon my client Ms. Kangana Ranaut or her sister Ms. Rangoli to any police station to record their statement as a witness under Section 160 of CRPC. The witness summons sent to my client and her sister by the Police Officer is patently illegal, as no woman can ever be called to the police station to record their statements as per the provisions of law."

He added,

“My client who is shown to be a victim as per the claims of Mr. Hrithik Roshan has herself willingly expressed her desire to co-operate with the officers in accordance to the provisions of law, as well as in her reply to the summons she has duly reserved her rights to file an appropriate criminal complaint against Mr. Hrithik Roshan and his associates for hacking two of her email accounts, which includes the email from which Mr. Hrithik Roshan admittedly claims to have personally received about 1439 emails from my client on his correct email id as well the email from which my client was communicating with the alleged imposter.”

He went on,

"The crux of the matter is simple Mr. Hrithik Roshan had admittedly full knowledge of the so-called imposter in the month of May 2014. However, he did not wish to take any action against the so-called imposter for good seven months nor did he as a responsible citizen, then bother to take the required details of the imposter from my client during those seven months. Thereafter sometime in December 2014 Mr. Hrithik Roshan filed an informal complaint with the cyber cell, with full knowledge that no investigation shall be carried out by the Police on an informal complaint. During this time Mr. Hrithik Roshan admittedly started receiving mails from my client on his correct email id for more than a year, however he did not block them for reasons best known to him. Mr. Hrithik Roshan then thereafter sent a defamation Notice to my client stating my client defamed him because "Silly-Ex" referred to by my client in one of her interviews was him. In his Notice, he claimed that he did not know my client socially at all. He also interalia claimed that he was receiving 50 emails a day from my client. He further specifically claimed that my client was using his name to gain publicity. In reply to his Advocate's notice, I on behalf of my client proved the extent of blatant lies that his notice contained and questioned him as to how was he attending my client's private birthday party with his entire family and my client was attending his party besides his sister's and his father's birthday party as well, if he did not know my client socially at all. Besides I questioned him on his exaggerated claims of receiving 50 emails from my client ever day and why did he prudently not block my client if it was one-way communication. The basis of sending a defamation notice was also questioned as no case for defamation was made out in the Notice. Mr. Hrithik Roshan was also prudently questioned as to why no case was registered against an imposter at the right time when it was required. He was required to act on my notice within 7 days. However thereafter on receiving my notice on the 1st of March he cleverly chose to maintain a 'dignified silence" as there could not have been any good reply to my notice where his statements were proved to be blatant lies. Subsequent to this he conveniently chose to divert all media attention to a so-called imposter to deviate from the main subject of having criminally threatened my client and having intimidated her, without any provocation or good reason at all. As a matter of fact it is my client who has actually suffered and has yet maintained a dignified silence so far. These acts of deviating media attention by filing a belated F.I.R. after about 2 years against a so-called imposter pursuant to receipt of my notice is another  unintelligent attempt. Things were started by Mr. Hrithik Roshan and he should come forward and end it in a proper manner. "

Write a comment

Bigg boss 12
Election 2018