In a significant development in an ongoing legal saga, Indian cricketer Prithvi Shaw has formally and strongly opposed an appeal filed against him by social media influencer Sapna Gill. Shaw submitted a detailed reply before a sessions court in Mumbai, branding Gill's petition as baseless and malicious.
The Core of the Legal Dispute
The roots of this courtroom battle trace back to an alleged altercation in 2023. The incident reportedly began as an argument over selfies at a suburban hotel in Mumbai. The situation escalated, leading to a confrontation and the subsequent arrest of Sapna Gill. After being released on bail, Gill attempted to file a formal police complaint against Prithvi Shaw and his associate, Ashish Yadav.
However, the police declined to register a First Information Report (FIR) in the matter. They informed the court that their preliminary investigation found no substance to the criminal allegations made against Shaw or his associates. Following this, a magistrate ordered a probe under CrPC Section 202, a procedural step to ascertain if sufficient evidence exists to proceed with the case.
Shaw's Strong Rebuttal in Court
Undeterred by the police's initial findings, Sapna Gill, through her lawyer Advocate Ali Kaashif Khan, filed a revision petition with a sessions court in April 2024. It is this petition that Prithvi Shaw has now vehemently opposed.
In his official reply, the cricketer has labeled Gill's appeal as "false, frivolous, vexatious". He accused her of filing it with the sole intention to "malign, defame and harass him by misusing his public image and celebrity status." Shaw's legal response further argues that after being released from jail, Gill chose to file the complaint "by playing womanhood card with sole intention to settle the personal vendetta as counterblast to the FIR."
The cricketer's submission states, "Such belated accusations are not only afterthought but a false, concocted version made with oblique motive." This strong language underscores Shaw's position that the legal challenge is a retaliatory move rather than a pursuit of genuine justice.
What Happens Next?
With Shaw's detailed reply now on record, the sessions court will examine the merits of both sides' arguments. The court's decision on Gill's revision petition will determine whether the magistrate's order for a probe under CrPC Section 202 will stand or be overturned. The case highlights the complex intersections of celebrity, social media influence, and the legal system, where allegations can quickly spiral into protracted legal battles.
The outcome is awaited by both parties, as it will either pave the way for a further inquiry or effectively bring this chapter of their dispute to a close based on the existing investigative findings.
