Cops summon Kangana in Hrithik's fake ID case, actress refuses to appear

There’s no end in sight to the legal battle between Hrithik Roshan and Kangana Ranaut. Hrithik has told the police that Kangana was the “fan” who had been interacting with the imposter who was pretending to be Hrithik Roshan.

The pretender had been using the fake email ID hroshan@-email.com to be in contact with the actor’s fans and friends. The Mumbai police’s cyber crime cell has issued summons to the actress to record her statement and has given her seven days.

Since her sister Rangoli was also aware of the incident, she too has been ordered to appear too. However, Kangana has been claiming that it was Hrithik himself who was interacting with her through the mentioned email ID.

Kangana also maintains that it wasn’t fake. Meanwhile Kangana’s advocate Rizwan Siddiquee stated, “No Police Officer can summon my client Ms. Kangana Ranaut or her sister Ms. Rangoli to any police station to record their statement as a witness under Section 160 of CRPC.

The Witness summons sent to my client and her sister by the Police Officer is patently illegal, as no woman can ever be called to the police station to record their statements as per the provisions of law.” However, Kangana has promised to cooperate with the police.

Hrithik had apparently found out about the emails from Kangana at a party and had gone ahead to lodge a complaint against the imposter in December 2014.

He hadn’t named Kangana back then but had informed that the “fan had send a lot of photographs and film clips on the fake email address, thinking that she was sending it to me and if it is used wrongly, it can prove detrimental for the girl”.

Kangana’s statement

Hrithik Roshan had admittedly full knowledge of the so-called imposter in May 2014. However, he did not take any action against the so-called imposter for a good seven months nor did he as a responsible citizen, then bother to take the required details of the imposter from my client during those seven months.

I... proved the extent of blatant lies that his notice contained and questioned him as to how was he attending my client’s private birthday party with his entire family and my client was attending his party besides his sister's and his father's birthday party as well, if he did not know my client socially at all.

Hrithik Roshan was also prudently questioned as to why no case was registered against an imposter at the right time when it was required. However thereafter on receiving my notice on the 1st of March he cleverly chose to maintain a 'dignified silence" as there could not have been any good reply to my notice where his statements were proved to be just blatant lies.