Rajpal Yadav has been in the midst of a legal trouble since the last few months. After he got bail and was released from Tihar jail in Rs 9 crore debt case, the actor was given time to repay the loan but he continued to violate the orders of the court. For those not in the know, Rajpal Yadav is in a legal tiff with Madhavav Gopal Agrawal, who represents M/s Murali Projects Pvt Ltd. As per the court’s verdict on Friday, Yadav has got no relief and has been sentenced to three months imprisonment.Explaining why the actor has been given three months in jail, Advocate Avnish Sikka, representing Murli Projects Pvt Ltd, said, as reported by ANI, “Today, the cases filed by Rajpal Yadav were reserved for orders. As per the Delhi High Court judgement, all 21 cases filed by Rajpal Yadav have been dismissed, and the order passed by the Sessions court has been upheld. The court has directed him to undergo imprisonment for a period of three months; he has also been directed to pay a fine of Rs 1.05 crores in each case. The sentence of 3 months’ imprisonment has to run concurrently. Mrs Radha Rajpal Yadav was also one of the accused in these cases. She has been ordered to pay Rs 5 lakh as fine in each case. While the case was being pronounced, his counsel prayed for probation. The court declined his relief for probation. The court has taken into consideration the repeated violation of his undertakings given to the court, coupled with the fact that on the very last day Rajpal Yadav said, ‘I am ready to go to jail 5 times but won’t pay a penny.’ A period of two months has been given to him to either comply with the order or challenge the sentence in the Supreme Court.”For those not in the know, earlier, Businessman Madhav Gopal Agrawal, who had loaned Rs 5 crore to the actor for his 2012 directorial venture ‘Ata Pata Laapata’ had said, agreed to the loan after Rajpal’s wife, Radha, sent him emotional messages appealing for help. He emphasized that the agreement clearly stated that repayment would not be influenced by the film’s box office performance, censor certification, or any other hurdle. The actor, he said, had also provided a personal guarantee.The businessman added that the transaction was strictly a loan and not an investment, noting that investments typically do not involve personal guarantees or post-dated cheques.Since then, Yadav has denied to return the money. Agarwal also said that during the early phase of the conflict, he visited the actor’s residence and “cried in front of him like a child,” explaining that the funds he had lent were themselves borrowed from others. He said he repeatedly requested Rajpal to provide a specific date so a fresh agreement could be drafted.