Who Is Madhav Gopal Agrawal? The Businessman Who Lent Rajpal Yadav Rs 9 Crore

Madhav Gopal Agrawal is a businessman who lent Rs 5 crore to Bollywood actor Rajpal Yadav to finance his directorial debut, Ata Pata Laapata.

Rajpal Yadav was released from Tihar jail today following Delhi High Court's order.

Source : X

Show Quick Read

Key points generated by AI, verified by newsroom

Bollywood actor Rajpal Yadav has been released from Tihar Jail after spending over 10 days behind bars. He was granted interim bail by the Delhi High Court in connection with a cheque bounce case. Amid this, businessman Madhav Gopal Agrawal, who had lent Yadav money for his directorial debut, has finally spoken publicly about the matter.

Agrawal claimed he was left devastated, saying he even cried in front of the actor because the money he had lent was itself borrowed from others. He said he repeatedly begged Rajpal Yadav to give him a clear date so that a fresh repayment agreement could be drafted.

Who is Madhav Gopal Agrawal?

Madhav Gopal Agrawal is associated with M/s Murali Projects Pvt Ltd. According to him, he first met Rajpal Yadav through Rajya Sabha MP Mithilesh Kumar Katheria. Agrawal said that at the time, Yadav told him the film was in its final stages and that “everything would go to waste” if funding wasn’t arranged immediately.

He also claimed that when he initially refused to lend money, Yadav’s wife, Radha, reached out to him and that he was moved by her emotional appeal. He then gave him Rs 5 crore to the actor. 

What did the agreement say?

As per the agreement, the money was not treated as an investment. It clearly stated that the film’s success or failure would not affect repayment, and that Rajpal Yadav would return the full amount within the agreed timeline.

However, when the actor failed to repay, Agrawal contacted him and was allegedly told that Yadav did not have sufficient funds. Agrawal claimed that fresh agreements were drafted three times, and that Yadav issued multiple replacement cheques for repayment.

Later, Agrawal said he discovered that repayment was being linked to the completion of the film. When he still did not receive his money, he approached the court and also sought a stay on the film’s release. Eventually, after Yadav assured him that repayment would be possible only after the film’s release, both parties reached a new settlement, and Agrawal withdrew his request for a stay.

Unfortunately, the film failed to perform well at the box office. About a year after its release, Agrawal approached the court again, and the dispute escalated further. What happened is history.