Financial dispute regarding Drishyam 2: Delhi HC sells producers without providing relief

New -delhi [India]August 7 (Ani): The Delhi High Court has sold a plea by Kumar Mangat Pathak, director of M/S Panorama studios, to end the criminal proceedings set against him on the matter of financial fraud related to the overseas rights of the Ajay Devgn -Film ‘. The case is about allegations of a £ 4.3 fraud involving the Chinese language distribution rights of the film across China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. The fir, submitted in June 2025, accuses Pathak, Bharat Sevak, and others of conspiracy, documenting forgery and misrepresentation of rights. Pathak approached the court to end the FIR registered by the Economic Missions Wing (Eow), claiming that the case is purely commercial in nature and was mistakenly criminalized. His lawyer argued that he had already worked on the investigation and that he had investigated parallel remedies. Justice Neena Krishna Bansal refused to keep the petition pending or granting any interim protection, and noted that the investigation was still in the early stage. The court noted that since the filor had already joined the investigation, no interference was justified at this point. The complaint was filed by a Delhi businessman who claimed to have been deceived in the £ 4.3 investment on the basis of forged documents. He claims to have promised exclusive Chinese distribution rights for Drishyam 2 through an agreement offered by Bharat Sevak, who introduced himself as an authorized representative of Panorama studios and a partner at Terra Bento Mines & Minerals. Sevak allegedly produced a term page and facilitated meetings with important members of the production house, including Kumar Mangat Pathak. According to the complaint, the businessman was also promised a share in the sales revenue. While Sevak claims to have transferred £ 15.75 from a total transaction value of £ 16.40 crore, Panorama Studios refused to receive the funds and claimed that the money was deposited into an unrelated account. In response, Pathak presented evidence stating that any authorization given to Sevak was limited and well expired before the alleged agreement. The petition to end the FIR contains legal quotes and a public notice issued by Panorama studios, warning third parties against unauthorized claims made by Sevak. (Ani)