Mumbai: Bollywood actor Nawazuddin Siddiqui said he will withdraw his habeas corpus regarding his children if he is allowed to meet them.
His ex-wife Aaliya had earlier released a video claiming that her mother-in-law kicked out her children and now they have nowhere to go. Siddiqui later said that Aaliya only wants more money.
"You were silent only in words, not actions. The fact is that as an irresponsible father. you sent my minor daughter to another country with your male manager and made them stay in (one hotel unit) without my knowledge and consent. Your male manager, during this period, hugged my minor daughter multiple times in an inappropriate manner and all of this was done despite her expressed objections. You cannot deny that those acts were done by your manager when neither me nor you were around," said Aaliya. She also alleged that Nawazuddin used political power to get her arrested but did not succeed.
The actor later wrote on Instagram: "I am termed as a bad guy everywhere because of my silence. The reason I have kept quiet is because all this tamasha (show) will somewhere be read by my small children. Social Media Platforms, Press, and a bunch of people are really enjoying my character assassination on the basis of one-sided and manipulated videos."
According to the actor's advocate Pradeep Thorat, the only reason habeas corpus was filed is that children were missing school in Dubai. "I am aware of the limited relief that I can get in this petition. He has not seen his children physically. This is his limited concern. After that, I will withdraw the petition." "All concerns as of now are being communicated through lawyers on email, which is basically for the demand of money. On the next date of hearing, on March 27, the parties are to meet in the chamber of the judges. We can keep this case after that," he added.
The lawyer representing Aaliya, Shikhar Khandelwal said: "My client is willing to settle the matter. But when she is living with the children at the actor's mother's residence, then how is it possible that he does not know where they are? He is very much free to meet his children. He is the one who is not meeting them."
The matter is in the Bombay High Court.