Bollywood News

Priya Kapur’s fierce resistance to forensic scrutiny of her late husband Sunjay Kapur’s alleged Will, coupled with a series of reversals by the document’s purported executor on how she first received it, may inject a sharp new twist into one of India’s most closely watched inheritance battles.

In submissions on Tuesday before the joint registrar of the Delhi High Court, Gagandeel Jindal, Sunjay Kapur’s third wife Priya Sachdev Kapur vehemently opposed any forensic examination of the Will that underpins her claim to Sunjay Kapur’s personal estate and to effective control over the Sona Comstar Group, whose assets are valued at more than Rs30,000 crore.

The demand for forensic inspection was pressed by Kapur’s children from his earlier marriage, Samaira and Kiaan Raj Kapur, who argue that basic scientific scrutiny is essential to establish the document’s authenticity.

Such resistance, lawyers following the case say, is unusual in a probate dispute of this magnitude. Courts routinely rely on handwriting, ink and paper analysis to test disputed testamentary documents. Blocking that process, they argue, risks amplifying — rather than settling — doubts over a Will that entirely excludes Kapur’s biological children.

Suri’s shifting statements intensify doubts over Will’s authenticity

Those doubts have deepened further with dramatic shifts in the position taken by Shradha Suri Marwah, who is described as the Will’s executor.

On Tuesday, Suri moved the High Court to amend her own earlier statement on how, and from whom, she first received the Will — acknowledging that her previous account to the court was incorrect.

Initially, Suri stated that she had received the Will from Priya Kapur on 24 June. She later amended this to say the document came instead from Dinesh Agarwal on 14 June. Now, after reviewing Priya Kapur’s submissions, Suri has reverted to her original position, again claiming that Priya Kapur was the source.

Such oscillations have not gone unnoticed. During a hearing on 27 November, Suri’s counsel told the court that she had emailed Agarwal seeking to speak with the lawyer or legal expert who drafted the Will — a request that went unanswered. Legal experts say this is striking for someone supposedly entrusted with executing a complex, high-value estate.

“Why would an executor learn of her own appointment not from the testator, but from an intermediary, and that too a day before the alleged execution of the Will?” asked one senior High Court lawyer, pointing to red flags around timing and process.

Suri has also conceded that she was unaware she had been named executor, had no independent legal advice, and lacked clarity on the Will’s contents. Her request for indemnity from Priya Kapur — an unusual step for an executor confident in a Will’s validity — and her admission that she saw no need to probate the document have further fuelled scepticism that standard legal safeguards were bypassed.

Counsel for Samaira and Kiaan, Mahesh Jethmalani, has argued that an executor cannot be appointed without prior consent under Indian law. Should the Will fail judicial scrutiny, Sunjay Kapur’s estate would devolve equally on all Class I heirs — including the two children excluded from the contested document, a point conceded by Suri’s own counsel in court.

The Delhi High Court is scheduled to hear both the forensic inspection plea and Ms Suri’s amendment application on 20 January 2026 — a date that could prove pivotal in determining whether the Will reflects Sunjay Kapur’s true intentions or unravels under scrutiny.