Rajpal Yadav reveals how cheque bounce case led to INR 22 crore loss

LifestyleRajpal Yadav reveals how cheque bounce case led to INR 22 crore lossBy Sarah Brohi-Apr 23, 2026Bollywood comedian Rajpal Yadav spoke about the legal case involving the cheque case. He also said that the case isn’t as simple as people think it is. Speaking in the recent interview on Shubhankar Mishra’s podcast, he noted that he pushed back against the common belief that he refused to repay money despite having a long film career. Actor Rajpal Yadav is a familiar face for comic roles in films that bring smiles to viewers’ faces, but this year, he mainly stayed in headlines not for his acting, film, or career but because of a legal case that landed him in jail for a brief period. In a recent interview, the actor tried to explain the matter regarding the cheque bounce case that has put his image under strain. The 55-year-old actor says the story is not as simple as people think. Speaking on Shubhankar Mishra’s podcast, he pushed back against the common belief that he refused to repay money despite having a long film career. Lifestyle News – Latest Entertainment News, Celebrity Gossip He said, “That’s exactly the question… the day people understand this, they will understand my entire case… I was not jailed because I didn’t have money. It was about a larger issue and a matter of principle.” The case goes back to a loan taken for his film Ata Pata Laapata. The project did not do well, and things spiralled. What began as Rs 5 crore, according to Yadav, grew into much bigger losses. He added further, “Ye 5 crore ka masla hota to 2012 me nipat ta. Iss 5 crore ne 17 crore ko dubane ka kaam kiya hai.” He also said a large part of the film was already complete. “Rs 12 crore had already been spent… it became a Rs 22 crore project…If even enemies are involved in a project, they should let it release. The audience should decide”. Reacting to fraud claims, Rajpal added, “In the film industry, out of 100 films, 20 work and 80 fail… If a film fails, it doesn’t mean fraud has...