Rakul Preet Singh has publicly separated herself from the Income Tax Department searches that have drawn the Bhagnani family and Panorama Studios into the headlines, denying that she is connected either to the search or to the financial practices being examined.
What she said
In an Instagram statement, Singh said the search was “not pertaining to me” and criticised self-styled online reporters and some mainstream journalists for sensationalising without verification. She said she comes from an Armed Forces background, had no industry “Godfather”, and has paid her due taxes since the age of 20 as a law-abiding citizen.
She was categorical on the specific allegations:
- She said she is not involved in any illegal foreign remittance, personally or on behalf of a production house.
- She said she holds no benami property anywhere in India or abroad.
- She added that no one has gifted her property and that she does not accept such “expensive gifts” as a principle.
Why the connection matters
The searches were carried out across 12 Mumbai premises and have been connected in reports to major film industry figures, among them veteran producer Vashu Bhagnani, his son Jackky Bhagnani and Panorama Studios. Singh is married to Jackky Bhagnani.
The Bhagnani family has been associated with Pooja Entertainment; Panorama Studios is a separate production and distribution company in Hindi cinema. The search operation was reportedly focused on financial transactions, film financing records and allegations of overseas fund transfers.
The distinction is material. When a spouse is named near a company under scrutiny, the financial relationship is not automatically the same as the company’s. Singh’s denial is unusually specific: no benami property, no illegal foreign remittance, and no property gifted to her. She is asking coverage to treat her as an individual taxpayer, not an extension of a business house.
The larger point
Singh’s statement is about the cost of attaching an individual to an institution under scrutiny. She did not only deny the specific allegations; she asked media organisations to retract reports, arguing that “commercial pressures” cannot justify ignoring facts or harming a reputation and livelihood.
She also drew a line between scrutiny of the Bhagnani family businesses and her own career. By framing herself as someone who came up without patronage and has paid tax since age 20, she is anchoring the denial in a record rather than a statement alone.
That is a useful discipline for readers too. A search is an investigative step, not a finding, and sweeping language can outrun what an agency has actually established.
What to watch
The next meaningful development will be whether the Income Tax examination yields any formal findings or charges, and whether those name individuals beyond the entities already reported. For now, Singh has put her personal tax record at the centre of her answer.
If that record holds, the story may move back to the entities under examination. If not, the retraction request itself becomes part of the record.
Source: India Today
Comments