The Delhi High Court on Friday upheld the conviction of Bollywood actor Rajpal Yadav in a batch of cheque dishonour cases and sentenced him to three months’ simple imprisonment after finding that he repeatedly failed to honour settlement commitments and undertakings given to the Court despite being granted multiple opportunities.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma judgment the verdict on a batch of criminal revision petitions and criminal miscellaneous petitions arising out of proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The cases were instituted by M/s Murli Projects Private Limited in relation to seven cheque bounce complaints filed against Yadav.
The High Court sentenced Yadav to three months’ simple imprisonment in each of the seven cases and directed that all sentences would run concurrently. The Court also directed him to pay Rs 1.05 crore in each case to the complainant company. In addition, his wife, Radha Rajpal Yadav, was directed to pay more than Rs 5 lakh in each case as part of the financial liability arising from the proceedings.
While affirming the conviction and sentence, the Court observed that the Sessions Court had correctly appreciated the evidence and had already taken into account the amounts paid by Yadav pursuant to settlement discussions while determining compensation and fine. The High Court found no infirmity, illegality or perversity in the findings recorded by the courts below.
Justice Sharma noted that a predecessor Bench had earlier shown indulgence after Yadav expressed willingness to amicably resolve the dispute and settle the outstanding liability. Acting on those assurances, the High Court had suspended the sentence imposed by the trial court and referred the matter to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre in an attempt to facilitate a negotiated settlement.
However, despite repeated assurances, adjournments and extensions granted by the Court, Yadav failed to comply with the payment schedule and repeatedly breached undertakings given during the pendency of the proceedings. The Court observed that both Yadav and his counsel had made several representations regarding payment of the settlement amount, but the commitments remained unfulfilled.
The High Court further noted that substantial amounts had already been paid to the complainant during the course of the litigation. According to the Court, approximately Rs 2.25 crore had been paid and released to the complainant, while earlier proceedings recorded payments aggregating more than Rs 4 crore. The Court clarified that the amounts already received by the complainant would be duly adjusted while calculating the balance compensation and fine payable under the judgment.
The dispute traces its origin to a Sessions Court judgment delivered in May 2024, which convicted Yadav and sentenced him to six months’ imprisonment in the cheque dishonour cases. Following the conviction, Yadav approached the High Court seeking suspension of sentence and challenging the findings recorded against him.
Although the High Court initially granted interim suspension of sentence on the basis of his assurances that the dispute would be settled, it later expressed serious concern over his continued failure to comply with court orders. The Court found that Yadav had failed to deposit amounts he had undertaken to pay, including Rs 2.5 crore which he had sought permission to clear in instalments.
In February 2026, the High Court directed Yadav to surrender before the Jail Superintendent after holding that he had failed to comply with earlier judicial directions. His subsequent plea seeking extension of time to surrender was also rejected. While directing him to surrender, the Court had observed that special treatment could not be extended merely because an individual belonged to a particular profession or industry.
Yadav eventually surrendered on February 5 and remained in custody until the High Court granted interim suspension of sentence after he deposited Rs 1.5 crore with the complainant company. However, the Court noted that he subsequently failed to clear the remaining dues despite repeated undertakings and opportunities.
Observing that the conduct of the actor deserved serious disapproval, the High Court concluded that continued indulgence was unwarranted in view of the repeated breach of undertakings and non-compliance with settlement obligations. Consequently, it upheld the conviction, affirmed the sentence and compensation awarded in the cheque dishonour cases, and directed Yadav to undergo three months’ simple imprisonment.
The Court, however, granted Yadav two months’ time to avail of his legal remedies and challenge the judgment before the Supreme Court.
The post Delhi High Court sentences actor Rajpal Yadav to three-month imprisonment in cheque bounce cases appeared first on India Legal.