The FIR was lodged by Ajay Murdia, an Udaipur-based doctor and founder of Indira IVF, accusing Bhatt and his associates of cheating and criminal breach of trust. The complainant alleged that funds collected in the name of film production were diverted and misused. Seeking quashing of the FIR, Bhatt argued that the dispute was civil in nature, arising from a breach of contract, and therefore did not attract criminal liability. His counsel contended that, under the agreement between the parties, jurisdiction to resolve disputes lay in Mumbai and not Udaipur. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that Bhatt, a reputed filmmaker, had entered into an agreement with the complainant to produce four films with an investment of Rs 40 crore, followed by an additional Rs 7 crore. It was argued that one film was completed and the remaining projects stalled only after the complainant allegedly stopped further financing. Opposing the plea, counsel for the respondents told the high court that a preliminary inquiry conducted by the police before registration of the FIR substantiated allegations of misappropriation. The funds meant for film production were allegedly transferred to vendors and individuals having no connection with the project. Declining relief to Bhatt and others, the court stated in its order, “The allegations are not confined merely to non-performance of a contract; they involve deliberate diversion of funds, lack of transparency, and elements of dishonesty. The preliminary inquiry revealed evidence of fake invoices and circulation of funds.”It reiterated that when a cognisable offence is made out prima facie in a case, the high court should not interfere an ongoing investigation.
HC refuses to quash FIR against filmmaker Vikram Bhatt in funds embezzlement case | Jaipur News
Jodhpur: The Rajasthan high court Monday refused to quash the FIR registered against Bollywood filmmaker Vikram Bhatt, his wife Shwetambari Bhatt, and others in an alleged film-funding embezzlement case, dealing a setback to the accused, who are currently lodged in Udaipur jail.The single bench of Justice Sameer Jain dismissed Bhatt’s petition, holding that the case does not appear to be a mere contractual dispute and prima facie involves criminal misappropriation of funds. The court ruled that no interference was warranted at this stage and allowed the police investigation to continue.
