Pahlaj Nihalani rubbishes Kangana Ranaut's claims: "Whether you wear undergarments or not, it is not my job to look at it"

Kangana Ranaut has once again landed herself in hot waters after she ruffled Pahlaj Nihalani's feathers by making shocking revelation that the filmmaker had offered her a soft porn character before her debut and making her to pose for a photoshoot in a satin robe without undergarments. She further said that though she went ahead with the photoshoot, she opted out of the project and even changed her number post the incident.

However, Nihalani was not at all happy with Kangana's statements against him. The filmmaker warned Kangana not to mess things up with him as he has lot of things to say about her as well. He also revealed that he spent close to Rs 1.50 crore on that photoshoot and song.

Talking about the controversial photoshoot which Kangana said that she was given a satin robe to wear without any undergarments, Nihalani told India Today, "I have not forced her to do anything. Whether you wear undergarments or not, it is not my job to look at it. That is her call, how she is going to do the shoot. I was not present there, so how can she name me?"

Nihalani has also denied Kangana's claims about the film I Love You Boss being a "soft porn" film. He said that Kangana was bound by an exclusive contract with his production banner when she decided to leave the project making excuses. It was that time when Kangana was offered Gangster.

He even went on to call Kangana a "thankless person" and had even vowed not to work with her again after she had left the project.

"I helped her sign another film when she was under an exclusive contract. She is a thankless person. Whoever she has worked with, she has fought with everyone. She is not a cool person to work with. She doesn't deserve anything that she got," Nihalani said.

Nihalani also said that Kangana was lying about changing her number after she left his film. He said that he called Kangana the next day to ask why she was unnecessarily digging up the past and using her name. He said that whatever phone number she was using at that time, she is still using the same number.

"She has not answered, but after 12 o'clock, she messaged me, 'I missed your call, I will talk to you today.' But so far, she has not spoken to me. She said she changed her number. How many lies can you tell?" he added.

With Nihalani's counter-statement, now let's just wait and see what happens next in the days to come.