by Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty has finally addressed the swirling controversy surrounding the Rs. 60.48 crore fraud allegations linked to her former business venture, Best Deal TV. As legal proceedings intensify and restrictions on her overseas travel continue to dominate headlines, the actor has issued a firm and carefully worded clarification, strongly denying all accusations and urging the media to exercise restraint.
The controversy, which has been under investigation for several years, resurfaced with renewed urgency after the Bombay High Court passed an interim order directing Shilpa Shetty and her husband, businessman Raj Kundra, to either deposit Rs. 60 crore or furnish a continuous bank guarantee from a nationalised bank. This directive was issued while hearing their urgent plea seeking permission to travel abroad due to a family medical emergency.
With parallel issues emerging around their upscale restaurant chain Bastian and reports of regulatory scrutiny adding to the narrative, the case has once again placed Shilpa Shetty under intense public and media spotlight. Beyond celebrity interest, the matter raises larger questions about the criminalisation of business disputes, the use of Lookout Circulars, and the impact of legal battles on public figures.
Shilpa Shetty’s Official Statement: A Strong and Measured Response
Breaking her silence for the first time, Shilpa Shetty issued an official statement through her Instagram story, addressing the allegations head-on. Her response was firm, legally precise, and notably restrained in tone.
She stated that the allegations being circulated were “baseless and motivated” and categorically denied any wrongdoing. According to her, the issues raised in the complaint have been given a criminal colour without any lawful basis. She clarified that a quashing petition has already been filed before the Hon’ble High Court and is currently pending adjudication.
The actor further emphasized that she and her husband have fully cooperated with the investigation and expressed confidence that justice would prevail. She concluded by stating that she has complete faith in India’s law enforcement authorities and judicial system, and respectfully urged the media to exercise restraint since the matter is sub judice.
The statement reflects a conscious legal strategy: to counter public speculation without engaging in emotional rhetoric, and to allow the judicial process to take its course.
What Is the Rs. 60.48 Crore Case About?
The case centres around Best Deal TV, a business venture that operated between 2015 and 2023. The complaint was filed by Deepak Kothari, director of UY Industries Pvt Ltd, who alleged that funds amounting to Rs. 60.48 crore were misappropriated after being invested in the company.
According to the complaint, the funds were allegedly diverted and not used for their intended business purposes. Based on this complaint, Mumbai Police’s Economic Offences Wing (EOW) initiated an investigation into the matter.
Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra, however, have consistently denied these allegations. They have maintained that the dispute is commercial in nature and that the criminal proceedings are malicious, motivated, and aimed at extortion rather than justice.
Their legal team has argued that not every business failure or dispute constitutes fraud, and that the complaint does not meet the legal threshold required to establish criminal intent.
The Lookout Circular and Travel Restrictions
One of the most consequential developments in the case has been the issuance of a Lookout Circular (LOC) against Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra. An LOC is an administrative measure used by law enforcement agencies to prevent individuals from leaving the country, typically in cases involving serious economic offences or flight risk.
In this case, the LOC has effectively restricted the couple’s ability to travel overseas, including for personal and professional reasons.
The matter came before the Bombay High Court when the couple filed an urgent plea seeking permission to travel to London, citing Raj Kundra’s ailing father. While the court did not immediately lift the LOC, it passed an interim order directing them to deposit Rs. 60 crore or furnish a continuous bank guarantee from a nationalised bank as a condition for considering the request.
While such orders do not imply guilt, they often shape public perception, especially when celebrities are involved.
The Legal Argument: Business Dispute vs Criminal Case
A key phrase in Shilpa Shetty’s statement has drawn attention: that the matter has been given a “criminal colour without any lawful basis.” This argument lies at the heart of the defence.
Indian courts have repeatedly held that commercial disputes should not be converted into criminal cases unless there is clear evidence of dishonest intention from the very beginning of the transaction. Simply put, a failed business deal or disagreement over finances does not automatically amount to fraud.
By filing a quashing petition, Shetty’s legal team is asking the High Court to examine whether the allegations even warrant criminal prosecution. If the court agrees, the FIR could be quashed, bringing significant relief to the accused.
This legal principle has been upheld in multiple landmark judgments and continues to be a contentious issue in India’s criminal justice system.
Bastian Restaurant Controversies Add to the Pressure
While the Best Deal TV case unfolds, Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra’s restaurant chain Bastian has also come under scrutiny.
In Bengaluru, a police complaint was reportedly filed against a Bastian outlet under Section 103 of the Karnataka Police Act. The complaint alleges that the restaurant hosted a lavish private party and remained open beyond permitted hours, allegedly violating local regulations.
Such violations, while not uncommon in the hospitality sector, have attracted heightened attention due to the couple’s ongoing legal troubles. The timing of the complaint has further amplified media focus on their business operations.
Reports of Income Tax Scrutiny
Adding to the growing list of concerns are reports suggesting that Bastian’s Mumbai outlet in Dadar faced an income tax raid. While details of the alleged operation have not been officially disclosed, the reports have contributed to public speculation.
It is important to note that income tax searches do not automatically imply wrongdoing. Such actions are often routine or exploratory. However, when multiple controversies converge, they tend to reinforce public narratives, regardless of legal outcomes.
Celebrity, Business, and Public Scrutiny
Shilpa Shetty’s situation highlights a broader reality faced by celebrities who venture into business. Their commercial activities attract far greater scrutiny than those of ordinary entrepreneurs, and disputes that might otherwise remain private often become national headlines.
For Shetty, who has built a public image centred on wellness, discipline, and positivity, the legal battles present a sharp contrast. Yet, her measured response suggests an attempt to maintain dignity while navigating complex legal terrain.
Media Trials and the Call for Restraint
By urging the media to exercise restraint, Shilpa Shetty has drawn attention to the issue of media trials. In high-profile cases, public opinion often forms long before courts reach conclusions, sometimes causing irreversible reputational damage.
Indian courts have repeatedly warned against prejudicial reporting in ongoing cases, especially when investigations are incomplete. However, in the age of social media and 24-hour news cycles, maintaining balance remains a challenge.
Raj Kundra’s Past and Its Impact on Perception
Raj Kundra’s previous legal controversies have inevitably influenced how new allegations are perceived. Any fresh case involving him tends to be viewed through the lens of past events, complicating efforts to assess matters independently.
For Shilpa Shetty, this association adds an additional burden, as legal narratives often conflate individual roles and responsibilities, despite distinct legal identities.
What Lies Ahead
At present, several legal processes are underway. The quashing petition before the Bombay High Court remains pending. The Economic Offences Wing investigation continues. The status of the Lookout Circular is yet to be finally determined. Regulatory scrutiny involving Bastian outlets may also evolve.
Each of these will take time, and outcomes will depend on evidence, legal interpretation, and judicial discretion.
Conclusion
By breaking her silence, Shilpa Shetty has clearly stated her position: she denies all allegations, challenges the legal basis of the case, and places her trust in the judicial system. While the Rs. 60 crore fraud allegations and related controversies continue to make headlines, the final verdict will rest with the courts, not public opinion.
Until then, the case serves as a reminder of how easily business disputes can escalate into criminal allegations, especially when fame magnifies every move. For now, Shetty’s response reflects restraint, confidence in due process, and a determination to let the law take its course.
As the case continues to unfold, Shilpa Shetty’s statement marks an important moment of clarity amid speculation and conjecture. By firmly denying the allegations and reiterating her cooperation with investigating authorities, the actor has chosen to let legal process, rather than public discourse, determine the outcome. The ongoing proceedings will ultimately test whether the complaint stands on criminal grounds or remains a commercial dispute escalated through legal pressure. Until the courts arrive at a conclusion, the matter remains unresolved, and any definitive judgment would be premature. For now, the focus shifts to the judicial system, where evidence, legal interpretation, and due process will play a decisive role. As history has shown, high-profile cases often blur the line between accusation and accountability, making judicial restraint and factual reporting more important than ever.
