SC questions relationship pact between actress, producer in lieu of movie role

The contract stated that the producer, who had a divorce case pending with his estranged wife at that time, will also arrange a role for the actor in Bhojpuri films

The Supreme Court on Wednesday wondered if there can ever be a valid agreement between a man and a woman in exchange for a role in films. A bench of justices Indira Banerjee and Aniruddha Bose was amused to learn about a memorandum between a Bhojpuri film actor and a producer, also a builder, with stipulations regarding movie roles and their relationship.

Representational photo.

“Can such an agreement ever be accepted as a matter of public policy? Friendship of whatever nature this may be, what is the consideration? Acting in films?” asked the bench during a hearing on an anticipatory bail plea.

The contract in question was signed in May 2018 and said the 26-year-old actor and the 41-year-old producer were in a relationship since 2016 without any pressure or coercion. It added the producer, who had a divorce case pending with his estranged wife at that time, will also arrange a role for the actor in Bhojpuri films and that they will not level criminal accusations against each other over this relationship. But in July the actor registered a case against the producer-builder, accusing him of rape after deceiving and threatening her. She also accused him of blackmailing her by filming her intimate moments with another producer using a spy camera.

Fearing arrest, the man moved the Bombay high court for protection from arrest. His plea was rejected on December 21 with the judge noting that “spy camera is really a cause for concern.”

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who appeared for the producer-builder on Wednesday, called the actor’s complaint bogus and said it was filed with the only objective of “extracting money” from his client.

Rohatgi said the actor has made a similar complaint earlier too and later settled it after receiving a huge amount of money from another man. He said this is why his client decided to have an agreement with the woman.

Rohatgi showed to the bench the memorandum signed between the producer-builder and the actor to corroborate his argument that the relationship was completely consensual and that his client had agreed to give the woman roles in movies.

But the bench was unimpressed with the stipulations made in the agreement. It questioned Rohatgi whether such an agreement between a man and a woman can ever be a valid document. “What kind of an agreement is this? We cannot go by this.”

The bench said it is disinclined to give pre-arrest bail to the accused also because of the use of a spy camera. It asked him to approach the trial court for a regular bail after the surrender.

Rohatgi pleaded for some time to surrender since trial courts in Mumbai have limited functioning due to Covid. Accepting this, the bench gave the producer four weeks to surrender and apply for regular bail.