Actor Kangana Ranaut’s advocate Rizwan Siddiquee on Sunday reiterated that none of the emails allegedly sent by her to Hrithik Roshan after May 2014 should be treated as genuine unless verified by her. He questioned why Hrithik never filed a police case against the alleged email imposter despite Kangana’s sister Rangoli’s insistence in her mail to him on May 25, 2014 on filing a joint complaint.
“Rangoli had accused him back then of hacking Kangana’s email account and of having a relationship with her — through the email.com ID (which Hrithik says belongs to an imposter)— neither of which he specifically denied,” Siddiquee told journalists on Sunday .
Hrithik’s legal advisors refuted Siddiquee’s claim. In his legal notice and FIR, Hrithik had said he was taken aback on learning from Kangana on May 24, 2014 at a party that she received a congratulatory email from him over her film Queen, and was also surprised to receive Rangoli’s mail. His legal advisors said he had immediately replied to Rangoli, denying he ever wrote to Kangana from any such ID; he asked Rangoli what she was talking about and said it was “not funny”, and “if it was a joke”; he was the first to ask her to meet him to “get to the bottom of it”. His team calls Rangoli’s emails “inconsistent”: while in the first she accused him of hacking, in the second, following his reply, she suggested joint action if it wasn’t him. He replied: “firstname.lastname@example.org is NOT my account. Some one is playing a trick…” Rangoli didn’t meet him. Siddiquee said on Sunday, “Hrithik then completely stops communication with my client or her sister and instead, surprisingly starts receiving a lot of one-sided emails from my client (as alleged by him) during this time, which he diligently stores and maintains for future use, as is seen now. He during this time does not do anything to authenticate the genuineness of the emails, despite knowledge of the fact that my client’s emails were hacked continuously and which he had full knowledge of.” Kangana is scheduled to meet the police on April 30.Hrithik’s team said, “What was relevant to him at the time was to clarify that he had never mailed Kangana.”
They said that since he de nied mailing her from any such ID, which he denied was ever his, there was no question of any hacking or any relationship. They said he was surprised to start receiving mails from her on his real email ID from July 2014.Siddiquee said, “He belatedly goes to the police after seven months and files an informal complaint, and does not intimate my client or her sister despite their insistence to file a joint complaint.He then lies to the police as well as the public that he gained knowledge of the imposter from many people, including his fans and people from the industry.” The lawyer said Hrithik didn’t name Kangana because he knows “she would forthwith provide all details to the police”. “He then abandons his informal complaint filed in December 2014 and this February sends my client a defamation notice for her ‘silly ex’ comment… Hrithik doesn’t reply to my befitting reply and counter notice of March 1, but proceeds to revive his old complaint through an FIR on March 5 after being informed that her (Kangana’s) mails were hacked, names Kangana and her sister as witnesses and puts media pressure to record their statements without them being given a copy of the FIR,” said Siddiquee. “The question is why is Hrithik not even interested in finding out what mails and stuff the ‘imposter’ sent Kangana?” In law, while an FIR copy must be given free to the complainant, it is not legally obligatory for the police to hand a copy to a witness until a chargesheet is filed, said legal experts. Siddiquee told TOI, “I have applied for a copy of the FIR from the court now, since the police are not giving me one despite my request as my entitlement in law.”