Has success gone to Akshaye Khanna’s head? The Bollywood actor, who recently garnered acclaim for his role in Dhurandhar, has found himself at the center of a heated controversy. Despite not being the lead, Khanna’s performance as Rahman Dakait earned him widespread praise, but his recent exit from Drishyam 3 has left the film’s producer, Kumar Mangat Pathak, fuming. And this is the part most people miss: Pathak didn’t just let Khanna walk away quietly—he’s now accusing the actor of being ‘toxic, unprofessional,’ and letting success cloud his judgment. But here’s where it gets controversial: Pathak claims Khanna’s solo film wouldn’t even cross the Rs 50 crore mark, sparking a debate about the actor’s star power.
The drama began when Khanna reportedly renegotiated his fees for Drishyam 3, only to exit the project a mere 10 days before shooting was set to begin. Pathak, owner of Panorama Studios, didn’t hold back in his criticism. He revealed that he’s taken legal action against Khanna, stating, ‘I have suffered losses because of his behavior. I’ve sent him a legal notice, and he’s yet to respond.’ Pathak’s frustration is palpable, as he argues that Khanna’s recent success in ensemble films like Dhurandhar and Chhaava has inflated his ego. ‘He thinks he’s a superstar now,’ Pathak remarked, adding that Khanna even claimed, ‘Dhurandhar is working because of me.’ But is Khanna truly the reason behind these films’ success? Pathak insists it’s a collective effort, not a one-man show.
Pathak’s critique didn’t stop there. He recalled working with Khanna on Section 375 (2019), describing the actor’s on-set energy as ‘absolutely toxic’ and his behavior as ‘unprofessional.’ ‘Many people warned us not to work with him,’ Pathak said, adding that Khanna’s big offers only came after Drishyam 2 (2022). ‘Before that, he was sitting at home for 3-4 years,’ Pathak noted, implying that Khanna’s recent rise is tied to the franchises he’s been part of, not his individual stardom.
But here’s where it gets even more intriguing: Pathak revealed that Khanna demanded to wear a wig in Drishyam 3, despite the film being a sequel with continuity concerns. ‘How can his character suddenly grow hair?’ Pathak asked, exasperated. The producer also claimed that Khanna initially praised the script, predicting it would be a Rs 500 crore film, only to back out after Dhurandhar’s massive success. ‘He signed the agreement, took an advance, and then left,’ Pathak said, clearly disappointed.
Khanna has since been replaced by Jaideep Ahlawat in Drishyam 3, with Pathak confidently stating, ‘We’ve got a better actor and a better person.’ But the question remains: Is Pathak’s criticism justified, or is this a case of a producer lashing out over a fallen deal? Earlier reports suggested Khanna had revised his fee to Rs 21 crore, which allegedly clashed with the film’s budget. While Pathak chose not to disclose financial details, the fallout raises broader questions about professionalism, ego, and the dynamics of Bollywood’s power players.
What do you think? Is Akshaye Khanna’s success getting to his head, or is Kumar Mangat Pathak overreacting? Let’s spark a discussion—share your thoughts in the comments below!
