Payal Rohati says director wanted sex, did Dhokha

Payal Rohatgi has accused the director Dibakar Banerjee of Love Sex aur Dhokha of trying to seduce her. Recently discharged from a nursing home where she was being treated for depression, Payal Recently discharged from a nursing home where she was being treated for depression, Payal wants to lay open the love, sex aur dhokha that was done by the director.

Payal says a few months ago she sent an SMS to Dibakar, introducing herself and asking to meet him. According to her, since then they've been friends. "You could also call him a mentor." She adds they'd often talk about relationships – his and hers. "I spoke about my problems (split with Rahul Mahajan), and he'd talk about his marriage not working. He advised me to see a psychiatrist from Bombay Hospital, someone whom he sees to discuss his inability to be monogamous and his need for multiple affairs." She admits not minding being agony aunt to him.

Things changed after she auditioned for a role for his upcoming film, Shanghai. "I mentioned to him that I want to act, and asked for a role in his film. He asked me to meet Atul Mongia, his casting director. The scene required me to react to the news about my husband's murder. I think I gave my best because I cried my heart out. After the audition I messaged Dibakar, and he asked me how I was feeling. I told him I was very low because to portray the grief I'd imagined my mother dying." She claims he then offered to come to her house. "He'd been over before and we've hung out but he never misbehaved with me. So, I agreed. When he came, he commented that I had put on weight. I was puzzled. He then asked me to lift my shirt and show him my stomach. I got pissed-off. I told him not joke around as I was feeling low. I said to him, 'Let me be, and please leave.' And he left."

She says after that whenever she tried to call the director, he never took her calls. "After the positive feedback on the day of the audition, I was surprised when the casting director told me that Dibakar and the core crew preferred another girl. I messaged him requesting him to give me the role and that I was ready to do a two-day workshop, and also do a second audition. No revertal, no reply, nothing from this man who'd call me at least 20 times a month," she says in a high pitch. She says this behaviour from 'a friend' devastated her. She continues, "This must have happened to me before. But never from a friend. You can't fuck your buddy, if you are giving her a role!"

What Dibakar has to say...

The meeting: Payal contacted me first around March 2010 through many texts and phonecalls of an over familiar nature. She said she wanted to act in meaningful films rather than do item numbers. Upon her repeated insistence I met her at a Business Centre of a Five Star hotel in a business environment.

There I impressed that the ONLY way to act in my film would be to pass a screen test. Because her texts were flirtatious I clarified in a frank and forthright way – that if I were to ever cheat on my marriage, I would rather have an extra marital affair with a non actor than ask for sexual favours in return for a role as that would really go against my deepest principles. After that there were many calls and texts asking for professional advice. I learnt other directors had got similar calls too. However giving her benefit of doubt I referred her to my casting and workshop director whom she contacted.

The counselling session: After which there were many phone calls where she sought advice on a personal front. Realizing that she was a deeply troubled person I recommended acting teachers, playgroups, theatre workshops and a personal counselor to her. This counselor was someone I had consulted, during my darkest hours in 2004 when Khosla was not releasing and there had been a death in the family. This is no secret. Many of my friends, colleagues and my wife know about it. This was told to Payal as a way of telling her that all bad patches can be overcome if one is determined.

The screen test: She contacted me in early 2011. I told her to test for Shanghai by contacting my casting director. She insisted on meeting him and me for workshops before testing. I did not meet her in any way during this period though she called me for advice a few times. After testing for the role, she called him and me many times in a disturbed state. Apparently the testing for the role of a bereaved wife had seriously unsettled her. I told her to get on out and meet friends. I was on my way to a colleague's studio and she insisted on coming there, to presumably to talk to me about the test and cheer up. She also insisted that I pick her up. I was unwise enough to accede.

The meeting at her house: When I reached her place, she asked me up as she would take five minutes. I was barely there for a few minutes and my driver can affirm that. Nothing of any sexual, exploitative or suggestive nature transpired – I'm willing to swear in court to that. After which I escorted her to the studio, where an hour-long happy interaction with people present, while I withdrew to work. This is where the conversation about her weight took place! My colleague remembers it! And there was no request to lift her top – but a discussion on the weight of the character she was testing for! She started texting me shortly after this, asking about the screen test results. I texted her to please check with my casting director, as is my policy. Upon which the texts again became insistent and troubled. This time I took a call as this repetitive pattern of help-anxiety-help was taking its toll. I decided to end communication.

After ending communication: Her texts became angrier, more disturbed. She called me and my casting director in the middle of the night in an angry state. Then all communication stopped. The screen test cue sheet proves the date is 7th February. Why does one take so long to ask redressal? During this clarification you will note that I have not betrayed the many details of Payal's confidential life that she narrated to me while asking for advice. My cardinal mistake has been to take her aim to act in meaningful roles sincerely. And in my well-meaningness and well known practice of being cordial and respectful to all who approach me, misjudged her desperation and level of disturbance and the length she's willing to go to damage a well wisher who just happened to give her a screen test and then not find her suitable.