Deepak Poduval has filed an FIR against former partner Rishabh Telang, alleging forgery during the 2019 dissolution of an older company, Cult Fitness Private Limited. While the fitness major Cult.fit has clarified that it is not involved in the lawsuit, the legal dispute surfaces as the company prepares for an IPO to raise ₹950 crore. Investors may keep an eye on how these legacy issues are managed during the public listing process.
A legal dispute has emerged involving the early history of the fitness brand Cult.fit. Deepak Poduval, a co-founder of CultFit Healthcare, has filed a First Information Report (FIR) against his former business partner and brother-in-law, Rishabh Telang. The FIR, registered on August 6, 2026, alleges that Telang forged Poduval's signatures on documents to wind up an older company named Cult Fitness Private Limited in 2019.
Poduval claims that this action led to the closure of the entity and the loss of his 50% shareholding without any financial payment. He alleges that he only discovered these filings earlier this year after reviewing records on the Ministry of Corporate Affairs portal.
Impact on Cult.fit and IPO Process
This development comes as the current Cult.fit platform, operated by Cure.fit, is in the process of moving toward an Initial Public Offering (IPO). The company has already filed its Draft Red Herring Prospectus (DRHP) to raise ₹950 crore. Because the name of the accused entity—Cult Fitness Private Limited—is similar to the brand, the news has drawn attention.
However, the company has issued a clarification stating that neither it nor its subsidiaries are part of the FIR. Management explained that the entity mentioned in the police complaint was an independent company and that the current Cult.fit platform has no management or ownership control over it. The company further noted that it had acquired specific assets and the brand name 'Cult - The Workout Station' from Poduval and the older company back in 2016 through contractual agreements.
Defense and Counterclaims
Rishabh Telang has strongly denied the accusations of forgery. In his response, he stated that Poduval was aware of the transactions involving the older company and the 2019 winding-up process. Telang has also suggested that the legal action might be linked to a separate property settlement case filed against Poduval by his wife—Telang’s sister—in July 2026. He intends to contest the allegations legally to clear his name.
What Investors Should Monitor
For investors eyeing the upcoming IPO, the primary concern in such situations is corporate governance and the clarity of historical records. While the company has distanced itself from the specific entity named in the FIR, public disputes involving founders or former partners often attract increased scrutiny from regulators and market analysts during the pre-listing phase.
Investors may monitor the progress of the DRHP process and any further regulatory clarifications or disclosures the company might provide regarding this legacy issue. The clarity of the company’s history and the clean separation of past entities remain key factors that potential shareholders typically assess before deciding on an investment.