The Hrithik-Kangana saga has got uglier with allegations and counter allegations
Actor Hrithik Roshan unleashed the proverbial can of worms with a Facebook post where he said, “I choose to be on a path of creativity, productivity and constructive work. Anything that isn’t in alignment with that, I tend to ignore, sidestep and treat as a distraction.” Then he mounted a full-scale self-defence of himself in the Kangana Ranaut affair, saying the two had never met in private and that though he didn’t want to be a good guy, the truth needed to be told, howsoever inconvenient. Highlighting the perils of male victimhood, he wrote, “We want to believe the other party because the rhetoric is, why would a girl lieIJ”
He questioned how two “high-profile celebrities” could have had a seven-year passionate affair without any evidence. But Kangana’s sister Rangoli immediately countered his claim with a photograph on a micro-blogging site. Hours later Kangana herself retorted through her lawyer Rizwan Siddiquee. She has issued some questions which according to her have remained unanswered by Roshan.
Siddiquee pointed out that even though his “client was lending full co-operation and was willing to be a part of the criminal complaint, then Mr Roshan had no good reason to lie to the police or cause delay in filing a FIR against an imposter. Then on what grounds did he lie to the police and only file an informal complaint instead of a FIR against an imposter, and that too without knowledge of my client, who was a concerned and interested party IJ”
He also questioned the timing of claiming that his email account had been hacked. “Why was it so important for Mr Roshan to wait for about seven months and first collect thousands of all sorts of beneficial emails from a hacked account, and only thereafter pursue an ‘informal police complaint.’ What was the aim and intent behind this actIJ”
Siddiquee cast aspersions on the reasons for filing the complaint. He asked, “Why did Mr Roshan only after receiving a strong reply notice, then seek to formally lodge a FIR after about two years against an imposter, and is now miserably trying to look for an imposter despite full knowledge that there never was any imposter in the first place. Had there been any imposter as alleged by Mr Roshan, then the said imposter would have already done serious damage with the material data which was collected by the said imposter through emailsIJ”
On Hrithik questioning Kangana’s mental stability of in the past, Siddiquee said, “My client and Mr Roshan share the same family doctor since many years and Mr Roshan knows fully well that my client does not suffer from any kind of mental ailments or syndromes whatsoever. Then on what grounds did he circulate an unreliable and fabricated email to the media. What was the aim and object behind itIJ”
There were some point to point rebuttals which were also made by the lawyer.
He said: There are 3000 one sided mails which either I have sent to myself or the woman in question has sent to me. The Cyber-Crime DeparTMent. can prove or disprove either story, in just a few days. Towards that purpose, I have surrendered all my devices including laptops / phones etc which are still lying with the cyber cell , but the other party has refused to do so. The investigation hasn't been closed.
She said: Mr Hrithik Roshan as a married man and father of two young children should have been shocked and should have immediately spoken to my client or her sister or other family members and complained about the emails being received by him. Why did he fail to take the right step and instead kept meticulously collecting these unverified and fabricated emails from a hacked account, instead of deleting them forthwith and reprimanding my client with full authority, if he had actually no guilt and had committed absolutely no wrong IJ
My client demands to know that except for unreliable, fabricated and unverified emails which Mr Hrithik Roshan is relying upon (and has never shown to my client till date), is there any other act of stalking that has been indulged in on the part of my client. If no then on what grounds is Mr. Hrithik Roshan claiming to be stalked by my client IJ
He said: The only so-called proof presented of this alleged “relationship”, was a photoshopped picture in the media. This was immediately exposed, the very next day by friends including my ex-wife.
She said: Besides my client states that no person would have under any circumstances circulated or shown to any third party (be it media or otherwise), any private pictures which were communicated by my client to Mr. Hrithik Roshan during a relationship. Then on what grounds and on whose advice did he seek to openly outrage the modesty of my client IJ