Actor Dharmendra Summoned In Garam Dharam Dhaba Fraud Case: Actor Faces Legal Heat

A Delhi court has issued summons to Bollywood actor Dharmendra and two other individuals in connection with a cheating case related to the Garam Dharam Dhaba franchise.

The summons, issued on December 5, follows a complaint filed by businessman Sushil Kumar, who claims he was duped into investing ₹63 lakh in the franchise, only to face a lack of response from the accused, as reported by Hindustan Times.

According to the court's order, the evidence presented in the case indicates that the accused misled the complainant and induced him to invest in the franchise under false pretences. The court outlined that the accused could face charges under sections 420, 120B, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pertaining to cheating, criminal conspiracy, and common intention, along with criminal intimidation under section 506, as reported by Hindustan Times.

Sushil Kumar's complaint details that, in April 2018, co-accused individuals approached him on behalf of Dharmendra to offer him a franchise of Garam Dharam Dhaba along NH-24/NH-9 in Uttar Pradesh. The complainant was promised significant returns, with the claim that existing branches in Delhi and Haryana were generating a turnover of ₹70-80 lakh per month. Kumar was convinced to invest ₹41 lahks, with the assurance of a seven per cent profit on his investment and full assistance in setting up the franchise.

However, the situation took a turn when the complainant was asked to increase the investment to ₹63 lakh, including taxes. A letter of intent was signed in September 2018, and Kumar paid ₹17.7 lakh by cheque, which was encashed, as reported by Hindustan Times.

He also purchased land for the franchise in November 2018. Despite these efforts, Kumar alleges that the accused never followed through with their promises, and failed to inspect the land or meet with him, resulting in financial losses and a sense of being cheated.

The case has been scheduled for further hearings on February 20, 2025, and the court has noted that, at this stage, only the prima facie evidence is being considered, as per media reports. The complainant's legal counsel, Advocate DD Pandey, is representing him in the case.