Rakul Preet Singh Denies Link to 12-Location IT Search

Rakul Preet Singh has publicly drawn a line between herself and the Mumbai Income Tax searches that have been making headlines, saying the action “was not pertaining to me.” Her statement on X follows reports that the department searched 12 locations as part of a film-financing investigation and that some of those locations were connected to her, producer Vashu Bhagnani and Panorama Studios.

The actor described the reporting as sensationalised and unverified, and she has asked outlets that carried the stories to issue corrections. Her denial is the strongest clean-up measure available short of an official department statement.

What she is refuting

Rakul did not respond vaguely. She named the specific allegations she wants separated from her name:

• No illegal foreign remittance in a personal capacity or for a production house.
• No benami property held for anyone in India or abroad.
• No expensive property gifts accepted, which she says she refuses “as a principle.”

She also situated the denial in her biography: a defence-forces background, a career built without a film-industry “Godfather,” and tax paid since age 20. The message is that she has paper trails and principles, not hidden deals.

Why this is landing during Ramayana season

The timing turns a routine clarification into a bigger Bollywood story. Rakul plays Surpanakha in Nitesh Tiwari’s Ramayana Part 1, now officially titled Ramayana: Rise of a Legend and set for an international release on 6 November 2026. Reports say she has begun dubbing, which means the project is in post-production and the campaign machinery is starting to turn. Any negative headline attached to a cast member is also a conversation about the film.

For fans, this is a useful filter for how entertainment news travels. A search can be reported, names can get attached through association, and then an actor has to spend a statement insisting that association is not an allegation.

What comes next

Rakul has asked publications and journalists to retract what she called speculative reports. There is no indication so far that her upcoming release schedule has been affected, and her statement ends with a clear instruction: facts before reputation, not the other way around.

Until an official tax-department statement names someone publicly, the fairest reading is separation, not guilt by proximity.

Source: The Times of India