Legal trouble deepens for Vikram Bhatt as the High Court refuses a quash order

vikram bhatt with wife

• Rajasthan High Court refused to quash FIR against Vikram Bhatt and others
• Court found evidence of fund diversion, fake invoices, and dishonesty
• Bhatt's request to treat case as civil dispute denied; investigation ongoing

Did our AI summary help?

Bollywood filmmaker Vikram Bhatt, currently lodged in a Rajasthan jail along with his wife, has faced a significant legal setback after the Rajasthan High Court refused to quash an FIR registered against him and others, ruling that the allegations suggest more than a simple contractual dispute and prima facie disclose criminal elements.

In its order, the Rajasthan High Court said, “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 has revealed evidence of fake invoices and the circulation of funds.”

The case stems from a complaint filed in Udaipur by businessman Ajay Murdia, who alleged that funds meant for film production—purportedly under agreements worth Rs. 47 crore for multiple films—were misappropriated and diverted. Murdia claimed that only one film was produced and that substantial amounts were siphoned off through inflated or fictitious invoices and suspect transfers to unrelated vendors.

The FIR includes charges of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and misappropriation of funds.

Vikram Bhatt and several associates, including his wife Shwetambari Bhatt, his daughter, business partners, and officials from the Federation of Western India Cine Employees (FWICE), approached the High Court under Section 528 of the BNSS (formerly CrPC Section 482), arguing that the dispute was civil in nature, centered on alleged breach of contract, and that the FIR should be quashed at this early stage. They also contended that the jurisdiction for any dispute should have been Mumbai, as per the original agreements.

Justice Sameer Jain, however, held that the material—especially the preliminary police enquiry—indicated prima facie dishonesty and deliberate diversion of funds, not just non-performance of a contract. The court noted alleged use of intermediary accounts, creation of inflated or fake invoices, and a lack of transparency that went beyond civil breaches. It emphasised that when an FIR discloses ingredients of cognizable offences, judicial interference at the quashing stage is not appropriate.

Also read: Filmmaker Vikram Bhatt and wife Shwetambari Bail, were denied again in the ₹30 Crore fraud case

The judgment stressed that Vikram Bhatt’s petition did not demonstrate grounds for invoking the High Court’s inherent powers to quash the FIR, as the allegations were substantial enough to merit a full investigation before trial.