Has Producer Kumar Mangat Pathak Been Granted Bail by Patiala House Court?

Click to start listening
Has Producer Kumar Mangat Pathak Been Granted Bail by Patiala House Court?

Synopsis

In a significant legal development, producer Kumar Mangat Pathak has been granted anticipatory bail by the Patiala House Court in Delhi, following allegations from Rajinder Goel concerning financial dealings related to the movie 'Drishyam 2'. The court's findings have led to a defamation suit against Goel, indicating a brewing legal battle.

Key Takeaways

  • Kumar Mangat Pathak has been granted bail in a significant legal case.
  • The court ruled that allegations against him lacked evidence.
  • Pathak plans to file a defamation suit against the accuser.
  • The importance of responsible media reporting is emphasized.
  • This case highlights the impacts of false accusations in the film industry.

Mumbai, Aug 14 (NationPress) Producer Kumar Mangat Pathak has received anticipatory bail from the Patiala House Court in Delhi concerning an FIR filed by Rajinder Goel.

Rajinder claimed he disbursed INR 75 lacs for the dubbing of ‘Drishyam 2’ aimed at its launch in the Chinese market, including China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.

The court found no merit in the accusations against Kumar Mangat Pathak after analyzing the facts, circumstances, and evidence presented. It noted that the ledger entries indicated the payment made to the corporate account of Panorama Studios International Limited was intended for a Gujarati film, not for ‘Drishyam 2’.

The producer's legal representatives stated, “It is explicitly mentioned that Mr. Kumar Mangat Pathak and his company Panorama Studios International Limited (PSIL) have never engaged in any transactions or agreements with Mr. Rajinder Goel. Consequently, he has not invested any funds with Mr. Kumar Mangat Pathak or PSIL. These accusations are false, unfounded, fabricated, and seem to be an afterthought aimed at creating a misleading and harmful narrative to tarnish the reputation of Kumar Mangat Pathak and PSIL. It is further clarified that any dealings or transactions conducted by Mr. Rajinder Goel were exclusively with a third party, not with Mr. Kumar Mangat Pathak or his company. Any attempt to connect Mr. Kumar Mangat Pathak to such transactions is entirely baseless and malicious.”

In light of the bail, Kumar Mangat Pathak has directed his legal team to file a INR 100 crore defamation suit against Rajinder Goel.

The producer’s lawyer, Vineet Dhanda, stated, “We also call on members of the media to act responsibly and avoid disseminating unverified and false narratives that can unjustly harm Mr. Pathak’s reputation and standing in the film industry.”

“The legal team will take all necessary actions, including legal proceedings, against any individual or entity found spreading such falsehoods,” he added.

Point of View

It is crucial to approach this situation with a balanced perspective. While allegations can often lead to unwarranted scrutiny, the legal system's ruling highlights the importance of substantiated claims. As the situation unfolds, it is essential for the media and public to remain cautious about spreading unverified information that can impact reputations in the competitive world of cinema.
NationPress
19/08/2025

Frequently Asked Questions

What were the allegations against Kumar Mangat Pathak?
Rajinder Goel alleged that Kumar Mangat Pathak received INR 75 lacs for the dubbing of 'Drishyam 2' for its release in the Chinese market.
What did the court conclude regarding the allegations?
The court found no merit in the allegations, stating the payment was for a Gujarati film, not 'Drishyam 2'.
What legal action is Kumar Mangat Pathak planning?
Kumar Mangat Pathak is pursuing a defamation suit worth INR 100 crore against Rajinder Goel.
What is the role of Kumar Mangat Pathak's legal team?
His legal team is tasked with challenging the allegations and pursuing legal action against false narratives.
How should the media handle this situation?
Media members are urged to act responsibly and avoid publishing unverified information that could harm reputations.