A fresh legal complaint has been lodged against social media influencer Apoorva Makhija after a reported remark in which she said she would be willing to sleep with someone for a sum of Rs 10–15 crore. The complaint, filed by fellow influencer Faizan Ansari, seeks immediate action from the Commissioner of Police Niket Kaushik and calls for an arrest warrant to be issued against Makhija.
In his letter to Mumbai Police Commissioner Niket Kaushik, Ansari described the alleged statement as "objectionable" and said it could set an unhealthy precedent for young women in Mumbai and beyond. He argued that such comments are "crude and irresponsible" and could negatively influence impressionable followers. Ansari also claimed that Makhija has a record of prior inappropriate behaviour that, in his view, has not attracted adequate legal consequences in the past.
According to sources close to the matter, the complaint was formally submitted to the commissioner's office. Police officials, however, have not publicly confirmed whether a First Information Report (FIR) has been registered. Standard procedure requires authorities to examine the complaint and decide whether the content of the alleged remark falls within the ambit of any penal provisions — such as those addressing obscenity, public morality, or incitement — before proceeding further.
The demand for immediate arrest raises both legal and procedural questions. Legal experts point out that an arrest depends on the specific sections of law invoked, the nature of evidence presented, and whether the alleged conduct constitutes an offence warranting custody. "Arrest is not automatic; investigators must assess if prima facie case exists and whether custodial interrogation is necessary," said a criminal law practitioner who reviewed the public details. Due process norms require a fair investigation and an opportunity for the accused to respond to allegations.
Representatives for Apoorva Makhija were not reachable for comment at the time of publication. Makhija, who has an active presence on social media and a sizeable follower base, has in the past drawn attention for her outspoken online persona. Any legal action could carry reputational consequences as well as potential professional ramifications, including platform moderation, loss of brand partnerships, or limits on monetisation depending on the outcome.
Public reaction on social platforms has been mixed. Some commentators welcomed the complaint, arguing that public figures should be held accountable for statements that might normalise transactional or exploitative behaviour. Others cautioned against criminalising expressions that fall within the scope of personal speech or satire, warning that overreach could chill legitimate freedom of expression. The debate underscores an ongoing tension in India between protecting public morals and upholding free speech in the digital age.
This episode also highlights broader concerns about influencer culture, where provocative remarks often generate rapid engagement and controversy. Observers note that sensational content can amplify both reach and scrutiny, placing influencers under heightened public and legal gaze. For critics like Ansari, legal recourse is a route to set boundaries and deter behaviour they see as harmful. For civil liberties advocates, careful legal calibration is necessary to avoid disproportionate responses.
If the police decide to register an FIR, the investigation will determine whether the alleged statement meets statutory criteria for offences. Investigators may seek corroborating evidence such as the original clip or post, timestamps, witness statements, and social media records. Depending on findings, the matter could progress to charges, settlement, or closure; alternatively, the complainant may pursue further legal remedies if dissatisfied.
For now, the matter remains under review. Both the legal process and public debate will likely shape the ensuing course, as authorities weigh competing considerations of community standards, individual rights, and the evolving norms that govern online speech.
Image source- PR