Magistrate asks for Rajesh Khanna's will
Court will verify if there is basis to the superstar's lover's claim that the will is fabricated
The murky saga over late superstar Rajesh Khanna’s property dragged on yesterday, with the Bandra Magistrate’s court asking to see the will so he could determine if it had been forged.
The court was hearing arguments for issuance of process against Dimple Kapadia, Twinkle Khanna and Akshay Kumar, who have been named in a criminal case lodged by the late legend’s live-in partner Anita Advani. The case was initially scheduled to come up for hearing on February 14. Confirming the development, advocate Manohar Shetty, Anita Advani’s lawyer, said, “There were arguments today, and the judge wanted to see a certified copy of the probate paperwork from the Bombay High Court.
What is strange is that probate formalities for the will were completed within 29 days, but we are yet to get a copy of the will even though we applied nearly three months ago. If we don’t get the copy soon we will make a formal complaint to the Chief Justice.” Metropolitan Magistrate SS Deshpande is hearing the case.
Anita Advani had lodged a criminal complaint for house trespass, robbery, lurking house trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint, forgery of will, criminal force, criminal intimidation and criminal conspiracy against the three stars, along with their lawyer and doctors.
According to her complaint, on June 19, 2012, Akshay, Dimple and Twinkle, on the pretext of visiting Rajesh Khanna, gained entry to his room and made Advani leave. The star was in delirium at the time. Advani has alleged that Akshay, Twinkle and Dimple discussed division of property and preparing a will.
According to Shetty, the next day, the trio returned with a couple of doctors and their lawyer, along with a will. They then obtained Khanna’s thumb impressions on the document and left. Shetty had told MiD DAY, “A day before his death, Advani had sent Khanna a legal notice staking her claim in Khanna’s property. Despite this, without giving any notice to her, the family obtained a probate for the will.”
He added, “Twinkle had replied to our notice to the family. She ought to have known that Advani had staked an adverse claim on Khanna’s property, and disclosed this in the application for probate.” The matter is now kept for further hearing on March 2.