Dharmendra summoned by Delhi Court in cheating case linked to Garam Dharam Dhaba

It is not good news for the fans of veteran actor Dharmendra. He has been summoned by Patiala House Court in Delhi, along with two others in a cheating case. The cheating case lodged against him is linked to his Garam Dharam Dhaba franchise. Read on to know more about it...

Dharmendra summoned by Patiala House Court

Judicial Magistrate Yashdeep Chahal summoned Dharmendra after businessman Sushil Kumar accused the actor of being deceived into investing in the Garam Dharam Dhaba franchise. As per ANI, the judge said, "The evidence on record prima facie indicates that the accused persons induced the complainant in furtherance of their common intent and the ingredients of offence of cheating are duly disclosed."

According to reports, an order released on December 5 reveals that the evidence points out that the accused knowingly misled the complainant, hence making a case of cheating.

“Accordingly, let the accused persons at serial number 1 (Dharam Singh Deol), 2 and 3 be summoned for the commission of offences under section 420, 120B read with section 34 IPC. Let the accused persons at serial no. 2 and 3 be also summoned for the offence of criminal intimidation under section 506 of IPC,” the court ordered.

The report adds that a letter of intent with the Garam Dharam Dhaba logo reveals the involvement of the restaurant in the transaction, with the other two accused individuals acting on behalf of Dharamendra.

The matter is scheduled for further hearing on February 20, 2025.

Sushil Kumar lodged a cheating complaint after he was approached by associates of Dharmendra in 2018 to invest in a Garam Dharam Dhaba franchise in Uttar Pradesh and was promised a 7% return on a Rs 41 lakh investment. Later, a formal agreement for Rs 63 lakh was signed in September 2018.

He reveals that after signing the contract, paying Rs 17.70 lakh and buying land in Amroha, Uttar Pradesh, the promised commitments were not met. He added that he was also threatened and faced financial losses, opting to seek a refund rather than pursue the franchise.