The Supreme Court on September 15, 2026, granted actor Rajpal Yadav a final two-week window to deposit ₹2 crore with the court registry, following a cheque-bounce dispute with M/s Murali Projects Private Limited. The court directed Yadav to submit a concrete proposal to settle the outstanding amount, which the complainant alleges remains unpaid despite multiple cheques issued in 2013.

The complainant, Murali Projects, claims that Yadav, along with his wife and company, had agreed in 2012 to repay approximately ₹11 crore, including interest, for financial assistance provided in 2010. The firm alleges that seven cheques totaling ₹7.35 crore were issued but dishonoured. The Supreme Court Bench, comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, extended Yadav’s exemption from surrendering until October 5, citing his non-compliance with previous court orders.

Senior advocate P.S. Patwalia, representing Yadav, sought two weeks to present a proposal and stated that Yadav would deposit ₹2 crore to demonstrate his intent to resolve the matter. Patwalia also noted that Yad, who has spent four-and-a-half months in prison, requires bail from his industry contacts. Meanwhile, Ajit Sinha, representing Murali Projects, emphasized the firm’s concern over the unpaid commitments.

The High Court had previously sentenced Yadav to three months’ imprisonment on July 10, 2026, after rejecting his plea for release on probation. The court also ordered his wife, Radha Rajpal Yadav, to pay ₹5.5 lakh as fine in each of the seven cases, with potential imprisonment if she fails to comply. The High Court’s 108-page verdict highlighted Yadav’s repeated failure to honor his financial obligations and rejected his appeal against the 2019 sessions court decision.

The Supreme Court had earlier issued notice on Yadav’s plea and stated that, subject to depositing ₹5 crore, he would be exempt from surrendering. The High Court had also clarified that ₹2 crore already paid by Yadav would be adjusted, with the remaining ₹1.04 crore to be given to the complainant and ₹25,000 to the State in each case.

The case remains unresolved, with the Supreme Court set to hear further submissions on October 5. The court’s decision underscores the seriousness of non-compliance with financial obligations and the legal consequences of repeated dishonour of cheques. The outcome of this case could have implications for how such disputes are resolved in the future, particularly for public figures involved in financial misconduct.