Kangana Ranaut says she has ‘nothing against’ Diljit Dosanjh years after their public feud

Must Read | Kangana Ranaut vs Diljit Dosanjh: Battle moves from X to box office, but who’s winning?

“I’ve got nothing against that guy. We’ve never even met in life,” she maintained. When asked whether she would be open to meeting him personally in the future, Kangana replied, “Why not?” Would she go the extra mile and text him if she enjoyed his performance in Main Vaapas Aaunga? Kangana replied with a laugh, “That’s too much, na?”

How the bitter controversy began

The war of words between Kangana and Diljit erupted during the 2020 farmers’ protest against the three farm acts passed by the Parliament in September of that year. As the agitations were ongoing, Kangana posted a defamatory tweet on X (formerly Twitter), claiming that an elderly woman spotted at one of the venues was Bilkis Bano, popularly known as the Shaheen Bagh Dadi, one of the prominent faces of the anti-CAA demonstrations in Shaheen Bagh. The actor further alleged that the woman went to such protests for Rs 100.

ICYMI | Madhavan says wife Sarita’s decision to move to Dubai for son Vedaant: ‘I am 6/10 as a dad’

Diljit slammed her for misidentifying the elderly woman. Kangana quickly went personal, calling Diljit “Karan Johar’s chamcha.” In retaliation, the singer-actor accused her of lacking “tameez” (basic courtesy). Kangana later alleged that celebrities like Diljit disappeared after provoking farmers. Diljit in turn mocked her attempts at maligning him.

When Mahinder Kaur rejected Kangana Ranaut’s apology

The 78-year-old woman, Mahinder Kaur, from Bahadurgarh Jandian village in Punjab, subsequently filed a defamation case against Kangana, and the actor eventually had to apologise to her. Kaur, however, refused to accept the apology and said, “She has never met me. I will not forgive her.”

She told The Tribune, “She is a big actress and political leader, while I am a small farmer. Yet she has made me come to the court at this age. She should realise how much her visit costs the state exchequer and the trouble caused to the public because of it. She says her remark was misinterpreted, but it’s not true.”