Kerala High Court Stays Film Producer's Cheating Case Against Actor Nivin Pauly, Director Abrid Shine

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (August 12) stayed proceedings initiated against Malayalam film actor Nivin Pauly and director Abrid Shine in connection with an alleged ₹1.9 crore fraud case.

Justice V G Arun heard the petitions filed by Nivin Pauly and Abrid Shine together and passed the interim order. 

“...I find merit in the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner in light of Annexure 4 Report submitted by the investigating officer as directed by the learned Magistrate stating that dispute is civil in nature and the complainant should resort to civil remedies, the Learned  Magistrate could not have forwarded the complaint for investigation under section 175 (3) without conducting further inquiry without adverting to the report and conducting further enquiry,” the court observed. 

A criminal case was registered against the petitioners under Sections 406 (Punishment for Criminal breach of Trust) and 420 (Cheating) read with Section 34 (acts done by several person in furtherance of a common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, based on a complaint by P.S. Shamnas, proprietor of Indian Movie Makers at Thalayolaprambu Police Station, Kottayam.

Shamnas alleged that after the box office failure of Mahaveeryar—in which he had invested ₹3.5–4 crore—the accused promised him a co-producer role in Action Hero Biju 2 and overseas rights profits. He claims the accused later concealed title transfer details and used an outdated agreement to sell the film's overseas rights to a Dubai-based company for ₹5 crore, causing him wrongful loss.

The counsel for the petitioners contended that the dispute is civil in nature and lacks elements of cheating and criminal breach of trust. It was further submitted that the Magistrate erred in forwarding the complaint to police despite an earlier police report finding no grounds for a criminal investigation.

Relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in "Delhi Race Club" (1940) Ltd v State of UP [2024 KHC Online 6452], the Counsel for the petitioners, argued that magistrate acted mechanically in forwarding the complaint to police.

The petition also accuses Shamnas of forging Nivin Pauly's signature in documents submitted to the Kerala Film Chamber of Commerce, for which a separate complaint has been filed. 

The case is posted on 11 September. 

Case Title - Abrid Shine v State of Kerala and Connected case

Case No - Crl. M C 7170/ 2025 and connected case

Advocates T Sukesh Roy and Meera Menon appeared for Nivin Pauly

Advocates S Rajeev, V Vinay, M S Aneer, Sarath K P, Anilkumar C R, K S Kiran Krishnan, Dipa V, Akash Cherian Thomas, and Azad Sunil appeared for Abrid Shine 

Click Here To Read/ Download Interim Orders