clear clear clear clear clear


AANKHEN 2 producer Gaurang Doshi issues a clarification on contempt of court allegation

September 10, 2016 11:07:53 AM IST
By Glamsham Editorial
Send to Friend

AANKHEN 2 Producer Gaurang Doshi had issued a clarification statement on the alleged contempt of court order.


In a statement issued to the press, the producer has given his clarification by his legal counsel, the statement reads

“Firstly, there is no contempt of court order against my client, there is only a show cause notice issued by the Hon`ble Court which my client shall be replying to. Secondly, the statement that legal notice have been sent to the director and to the actors also seems to be false to the best of the acknowledge of my client. Thirdly, the statement that my client`s previous counsel Chirag Modi had informed the court on August 9, 2016 that his client had nothing to do with AANKHEN 2, is also absolutely false. In fact, the matter was not even heard on August 9, 2016. The court records and orders clearly reveal the falsehood in the said statements of Rajeev”.

Further talking about acquisition of the film's rights, Doshi's counsel adds, ' AANKHEN 2 Rajtaru is very well aware that my client has purchased all rights in the film AANKHEN 2 from Eros International Media Pvt. Ltd. in whom the entire copyrights, all Media rights, Intellectual Property rights, Title of the film and all other rights in the said film exclusively vest for the term in perpetuity and for the Territory of whole world including India. Fourthly, that the statements that 'If work on AANKHEN 2 is not stopped, and arrest warrant awaits Doshi' is also baseless and only on presumptions and to tarnish my client`s image.'

Laying the blame on Rajeev Rajtaru, who had filed the case against Doshi, the lawyer says, 'In fact, it is Rajeev Rajtaru who has made false and misleading statements before the media with dishonest and malafide intentions by misquoting the facts on record in the pleadings and proceedings before the Hon`ble Court with an intention to prejudice the public at large as well as the Hon`ble Court while the matter is sub-judice. Rajeev Rajtaru has thus attempted to create hindrance in the process of law and has interfered with the administration of justice, which makes Rajeev liable for contempt of court. My client shall be filing appropriate application before the Hon`ble Court by placing all the above-mentioned facts on records and for appropriate orders and directions against Rajeev of Rajtaru Studios. My client is also contemplating filing of defamation proceedings against Rajeev of Rajtaru Studio.'