Background of the Inheritance Dispute
What began as a private family disagreement after the death of businessman Sanjay Kapoor has rapidly evolved into one of the most closely watched inheritance battles in recent memory.
Legal and Courtroom Dimensions
The dispute—now pending before the Delhi High Court—sits at the intersection of civil succession law, criminal procedure, digital forensics, and intense courtroom theatrics, making it a compelling study for lawyers and law students alike.
Core Issue of the Litigation
At its core, the litigation concerns the validity of an alleged will said to govern a vast estate, reportedly running into tens of thousands of crores.
But the case has moved far beyond a routine partition suit.
Parties And Background
The contesting sides include the children of the late Sanjay Kapoor from his earlier marriage with Karisma Kapoor, namely Samaira and Kiaan Kapoor, and their stepmother, Priya Kapoor. What initially commenced as a civil dispute over succession and inheritance has now entered a far more precarious legal zone—one involving allegations of forgery, fabrication of evidence, and perjury.
The Civil Proceedings: Partition And Interim Relief
A civil suit seeking partition and consequential reliefs is pending before the Delhi High Court. The children of the deceased have sought interim relief, claiming a share in their father’s estate and questioning the legitimacy of the will propounded by Priya Kapoor.
After extensive hearings, the Court has reserved orders on the interim application, indicating that it will closely scrutinise the pleadings, documents, and digital material before determining whether immediate relief is warranted.
The Criminal Shadow Over A Civil Suit
What makes this matter exceptional is the explicit invocation of Sections 338 and 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a move that could potentially convert a civil inheritance dispute into a full-fledged criminal prosecution.
Grounds For Criminal Proceedings
The children have urged the Court to initiate proceedings for:
- Giving false evidence, and
- Using fabricated documents in judicial proceedings.
If the Court is satisfied that the alleged will was forged or supported by false statements on oath, it may direct prosecution—an outcome that could expose the propounder of the will to serious criminal consequences, including imprisonment.
The Core Allegation: A Fabricated Will?
Timeline Of The Alleged Will
| Stage | Date And Location |
|---|---|
| Drafted | 10 February |
| Modified | 17 March |
| Executed | 21 March at an office in Gurgaon |
Grounds Of Challenge
The challengers dispute this entire narrative. They argue that:
- The deceased was not present in Gurgaon on the date of execution,
- Travel records, medical circumstances, and family interactions contradict the version put forward, and
- The attesting witnesses’ accounts suffer from material inconsistencies.
These contradictions, it is argued, go to the root of testamentary capacity and due execution under the Indian Succession Act.
Digital Evidence And The “Electronic Trail”
A striking feature of this litigation is the Court’s engagement with digital footprints. The dispute involves:
- Multiple electronic devices (laptops and mobile phones),
- Conflicting versions of drafts,
- WhatsApp groups and email transfers, and
- Metadata allegedly showing posthumous or post-execution alterations.
For law students, this case is a textbook illustration of how electronic evidence under Section 65B of the Evidence Act can make or break a succession claim—and how inconsistencies across devices can raise judicial suspicion.
The Executor’s Role Under Scrutiny
Even the role of the executor of the will has raised serious questions. Emails placed on record allegedly show uncertainty about:
- Who drafted the will,
- When the executor first became aware of it, and
- Whether the executor was merely informed after the fact.
Such contradictions weaken the presumption of regularity normally attached to testamentary documents.
Courtroom Conduct And Judicial Intervention
The hearings themselves have drawn attention due to heated exchanges between counsel, some of which found their way onto social media. The Court, presided over by Justice Jyoti Singh, made it clear that the courtroom is not a theatre and firmly curtailed melodrama, refocusing the proceedings on legal substance rather than spectacle.
What Is Pending Before The Court?
As of now, the following issues remain pending adjudication before the Delhi High Court:
| Pending Issue | Nature Of Determination |
|---|---|
| Interim Relief | Decision on interim relief in the civil partition suit. |
| Section 340 CrPC | Determination of whether a prima facie case exists to invoke Section 340 CrPC. |
| Authenticity Of The Will | Judicial assessment of the authenticity of the will, including digital and circumstantial evidence. |
| Executor And Witness Credibility | Clarification of the executor’s role and the credibility of attesting witnesses. |
Why This Case Matters
For the legal fraternity, this dispute is far more than celebrity news. It highlights:
- The thin line between civil and criminal liability in succession disputes,
- The growing importance of electronic evidence,
- Judicial intolerance for abuse of process, and
- The Court’s role in preventing inheritance litigation from degenerating into trial by media.
Whether the matter remains confined to civil adjudication or escalates into criminal prosecution will depend on the Court’s forthcoming orders. Until then, the Sanjay Kapoor estate dispute stands as a cautionary tale—and a rich learning resource—for lawyers and law students navigating the complex terrain of modern inheritance litigation in India.
Need Help Filing Mutual Consent Divorce?
Get expert legal guidance for a smooth, fast, and stress-free mutual consent divorce process. Speak directly with experienced divorce lawyers today.
📍 Delhi & NCR
Adv. Tapan Choudhury 📞 WhatsApp: 9650499965
📍 Pune
NirDita Law Firm 📞 WhatsApp: 8851978611
