Filmmaker Vikram Bhatt and his wife Shwetambari Bhatt have been granted regular bail by the Supreme Court of India after spending months in jail in connection with a ₹30-crore cheating case tied to a proposed biographical film project.
The couple had been arrested by Rajasthan Police in December and were lodged in Jodhpur Central Jail following a complaint filed by businessman Ajay Murdia, who alleged he was persuaded to invest over ₹30 crore in a biopic on his late wife based on promises of substantial returns that allegedly never materialised.
DON'T MISS
Vikram Bhatt: Supreme Court Suggests Mediation
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi set aside an earlier order of the Rajasthan High Court that had denied bail to the couple. While granting relief, the apex court noted that the dispute appeared primarily commercial in nature, even though allegations of cheating were mentioned in the FIR.
The bench observed that it may be appropriate for both sides to explore mediation and attempt an amicable settlement, adding that bail was granted with the expectation that efforts toward resolution would be made.
Case Background and Legal Context
According to the complaint, the investment was made for production of a biopic project that allegedly did not progress as promised. The prosecution had earlier argued that the case involved criminal intent rather than a simple financial disagreement, while the defence maintained that it was a business dispute that should be addressed through civil remedies.
Legal observers note that courts often distinguish between contractual disagreements and criminal offences in financial disputes. The Supreme Court’s suggestion of mediation indicates its view that reconciliation or settlement could be a practical solution, particularly where monetary claims form the core of the conflict.
What Lies Ahead
With bail granted, the case will continue to proceed through the legal process while the parties consider mediation. If talks succeed, it could lead to a negotiated settlement; if not, the matter may return to trial for determination of criminal liability.
The development has drawn attention within film and business circles, as it highlights the risks associated with high-value entertainment investments and the thin line that can separate commercial disagreements from criminal litigation.
