English
English
English
Veteran singer Kumar Sanu has approached the Bombay High Court seeking damages and content removal after interviews by his former wife resurfaced with serious allegations, reopening a long settled personal chapter and raising questions on consent and reputation.
Sanu seeks removal of interviews carrying serious personal allegations.
Mumbai: Renowned playback singer Kumar Sanu has filed a civil defamation suit in the Bombay High Court against his former wife Rita Bhattacharya, seeking compensation of Rs 30 lakh. The petition also asks for the removal of interviews that allegedly contain defamatory claims against him. The matter came up for hearing on December 17, 2025, marking a renewed legal confrontation long after their divorce was finalised.
The singer and Bhattacharya ended their marriage in 2001. Despite the passage of time, the latest dispute has brought their personal history back into public discussion, largely due to the circulation of statements made in recent interviews.
According to the petition filed on behalf of Kumar Sanu, Bhattacharya made several serious allegations during interviews given to entertainment platforms. She reportedly claimed that she was mistreated during her pregnancy, including being deprived of food, locked in the kitchen and denied milk and proper medical care.
Second daughter passed away in my arms: Govinda’s wife Sunita Ahuja
The interviews also allegedly included accusations that Sanu pursued legal proceedings against her while she was pregnant and that he was involved in multiple relationships during their marriage. These statements, according to the singer, were shared without any factual basis and presented in a manner that damaged his public image.
The controversy escalated in September 2025 when clips and excerpts from the interviews began circulating widely across social media platforms. The renewed attention quickly gained traction, prompting discussions and reactions that extended beyond entertainment circles.
Kumar Sanu argued that the widespread sharing of these claims intensified the damage to his reputation, especially as the allegations involved sensitive issues related to family conduct and personal integrity.
The defamation plea points to consent terms recorded during the couple’s divorce proceedings at the Bandra Family Court on February 9, 2001. As per the petition, both parties had agreed not to make allegations against each other in the future.
The singer’s legal team has argued that the interviews violate this clause and amount to a breach of legally binding commitments. This aspect forms a central pillar of the case, linking the present dispute to undertakings made more than two decades ago.
Why did Madhuri Dixit return to India a decade after settling in the US? Read here
Before approaching the court, Kumar Sanu issued a legal notice on September 27 to Bhattacharya as well as the media platforms that carried the interviews. The notice warned of criminal action if the allegedly defamatory content was not removed promptly.
The notice stated that the remarks created misleading impressions within social and professional circles. It further claimed that the allegations caused emotional distress and affected potential professional engagements, resulting in reputational and financial harm to the singer.
The petition has been filed through advocate Sana Raees Khan, who stated that the statements went beyond personal grievances and entered the realm of defamation. According to the plea, the interviews included remarks not only about Kumar Sanu but also about his family, using language described as derogatory and damaging.
The legal team maintains that such public statements, especially when shared widely, can have lasting consequences on an individual’s standing, regardless of how much time has passed since the events being discussed.
Kumar Sanu and Rita Bhattacharya share a son, Jaan Kumar Sanu, who became widely known after appearing as a contestant on Bigg Boss 14. The renewed dispute has once again drawn attention to the family, adding a public dimension to what had remained a private chapter for years.
The court is expected to examine whether the statements amount to defamation and whether they violate prior legal agreements between the former couple.
