How Ankiti Bose Waited 23 Months in Singapore Before Filing Serious Criminal Allegations

In 2014, a 22-year-old Ankiti Bose visited Bangkok’s Chatuchak Weekend Market. She watched thousands of small fashion sellers struggle without technology, digital catalogues, or access to online customers. That trip planted the seed for what would become Zilingo — a company she co-founded with Dhruv Kapoor in Singapore in 2015. Within a few years, the startup had raised hundreds of millions of dollars and reached a reported valuation of nearly US$1 billion. Bose was celebrated as a sharp, ambitious founder who had built something significant from an observation in a Thai market.

By early 2022, however, the story had begun to unravel.

During a fresh fundraising round, questions surfaced about accounting practices and financial information being shared with investors and the board. On 31 March 2022, Zilingo’s board suspended Bose from her role as CEO. Two months later, on 20 May 2022, the company terminated her employment “with cause” following an independent forensic investigation by Kroll into alleged financial irregularities. The investigation reportedly examined questionable vendor payments worth more than US$7 million, discrepancies in revenue recognition, and other accounting concerns. Bose has always denied any financial misconduct, claiming she was denied proper access to the investigation reports and was made a scapegoat.

What happened next is where the story becomes far more complicated — and far more questionable.

Instead of returning to India or immediately pursuing legal action, Ankiti Bose stayed in Singapore. She had lived and worked there since 2016. After her termination, she remained in the city-state, took up new employment, and gave several public interviews from Singapore defending herself and challenging Zilingo’s investigation. For nearly two years, she did not file any criminal complaint — neither in Singapore nor in India.

Then, on 23 April 2024, she suddenly travelled to Mumbai and filed a detailed criminal complaint at Kasturba Marg Police Station. The FIR, registered the same day against Dhruv Kapoor and Aadi Vaidya, contained serious allegations of sexual harassment, stalking, demands for sexual favours, intimidation, and conspiracy. Her lawyers told the media that the long delay was because her new job in Singapore had prevented her from travelling to India earlier.

This explanation sits at the centre of the controversy.

The 23-Month Gap

Bose later alleged that she had faced repeated sexual harassment during her time at Zilingo, including a specific demand for sexual favours in March 2021 in exchange for allowing her to retain her position as CEO. She also claimed she was subjected to inappropriate communications through fake accounts, stalking, and threats affecting her personal safety and mental state.

If these allegations were true, and if the harassment and threats were as serious and ongoing as described, it becomes difficult to understand why she remained in Singapore for 23 months without taking criminal action. Singapore is generally known for handling contested sexual harassment and related criminal cases with relative efficiency. Most such matters are resolved within 9 to 12 months.

Instead of pursuing remedies where she was actually living and working, Bose waited almost two years before filing a criminal complaint in India. This delay is not a small detail — it is the most significant weakness in her narrative.

During those 23 months, she was not in hiding. She was employed in Singapore. She gave interviews. She had the opportunity to approach authorities in Singapore if she genuinely feared for her safety or wanted swift justice. She chose not to. Only when she was ready to travel to Mumbai did she finally file the complaint.

A Disputed Internal Timeline

There is another important layer to this story.

According to Zilingo, formal harassment-related complaints were only raised by Bose after her suspension in March 2022 — once the financial investigation had already begun. The company has maintained that these issues were brought to the board only after the forensic probe into financial irregularities was underway. Bose’s side has disputed this version, suggesting that concerns existed earlier.

This dispute over timing is critical. It raises the possibility that the serious criminal allegations filed in April 2024 were, at least partly, a response to her termination and the damaging findings of the Kroll investigation, rather than a timely reaction to misconduct that began years earlier.

When a person files grave criminal allegations nearly two years after the alleged events, and after they themselves have been removed from their position following a forensic investigation into financial irregularities, questions about motive and timing become unavoidable.

Strategic Choice of Jurisdiction

Bose did not file her criminal complaint in Singapore, where she had lived for years and continued to work after her termination. She chose to file it in Mumbai.

By April 2024, she had already started pursuing civil defamation cases in Indian courts. The decision to file the FIR in India — rather than in Singapore — allowed her to engage the Indian criminal justice system while she was already active in Indian civil litigation. This sequence suggests strategic thinking rather than urgent action driven by immediate safety concerns.

The FIR itself has also faced questions regarding the exact scope and time periods covered. More importantly, as of mid-2026, there has been no publicly reported charge sheet or major development in the case. This stands in contrast to the relatively swift interim relief Bose has obtained in some of her defamation proceedings.

The GST Criminal Complaint Changes the Narrative

In November 2025, the Directorate General of GST Intelligence filed a criminal complaint against Ankiti Bose and Zilingo Global Pvt. Ltd. before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Mumbai. The court took cognisance and issued summons. The case alleges serious violations under the CGST Act, including issuing invoices without actual supply of goods or services and availing fake Input Tax Credit.

This development significantly undermines Bose’s public positioning.

For years, she has presented herself as the victim of a coordinated corporate attack. The GST criminal complaint, however, indicates that concerns about financial practices during her tenure as CEO were serious enough for a government investigative agency to initiate formal criminal proceedings. It directly connects to the issues first raised during the 2022 Kroll investigation into alleged financial irregularities.

This case makes it much harder to accept a simple narrative of victimhood. It suggests that questions about financial conduct under her leadership did not disappear after her departure — they escalated to the level of criminal investigation.

Using Defamation Cases to Control the Narrative

While she pursued criminal allegations against her former colleagues, Bose simultaneously used defamation litigation as an effective tool to push back against critical reporting about her own conduct.

She filed a high-profile US$100 million defamation suit against investor Mahesh Murthy and Outlook Business. She has also initiated defamation proceedings against Kapoor and Vaidya. In June 2026, a Delhi court granted her an ex parte ad interim injunction directing the removal of an article and restraining further publication of fraud-related accusations against her.

This pattern reveals a clear strategy. Bose has shown herself to be highly effective at using civil courts to limit negative coverage of the financial allegations surrounding her time at Zilingo. At the same time, the criminal complaint she filed has moved slowly in the public domain.

This dual approach — aggressive defamation litigation combined with a delayed criminal complaint — has allowed her to shape public perception while managing legal risks on multiple fronts.

The New Life Built on Unresolved Questions

Since leaving Zilingo, Ankiti Bose has successfully repositioned herself. She is now publicly listed as Founding Partner of Terra-Invest, a global investment firm with offices in Dubai, London, Abu Dhabi, and Miami. She has spoken publicly about corporate governance, founder accountability, and leadership. She has also been involved in new business ventures, including sports investments.

This public reinvention stands in sharp contrast to the serious legal matters still attached to her name. The 2024 FIR she filed remains without a publicly reported charge sheet. The 2025 GST criminal complaint against her is still at the summons stage. Questions about financial irregularities during her leadership at Zilingo have not been resolved through any final judicial process.

Her ability to build a new high-profile career while these matters remain pending raises further questions about accountability and transparency.

The Central Contradiction

When the entire timeline is examined together, one central contradiction becomes impossible to ignore.

Ankiti Bose has alleged that she faced serious sexual harassment, stalking, and threats during her time at Zilingo. Yet she remained in Singapore for 23 months after her termination without filing any criminal complaint there. She only acted once she could travel to India — after she had already begun civil legal proceedings in Indian courts.

If the alleged misconduct was as severe as described, why did she wait nearly two years? Why did she not pursue legal remedies in Singapore, where she was living and working? Why did she only file the criminal complaint in India at a time that coincided with her other legal activities there?

These questions do not have easy answers based on the public record.

Bose has maintained that she was wrongfully removed from Zilingo and became the target of a coordinated effort. However, the documented timeline of her own actions — the long silence in Singapore, the strategic filing in India, the disputed internal reporting chronology, and the parallel use of defamation litigation — paints a picture of calculated legal strategy rather than urgent pursuit of justice.

The 2025 GST criminal complaint further complicates her narrative. It shows that serious concerns about financial conduct during her time as CEO were considered credible enough by investigative authorities to result in formal criminal proceedings.

Until there is greater transparency on the 2022 forensic reports and final judicial outcomes on the multiple serious allegations now before the courts, significant doubts will remain about the consistency and motivations behind Ankiti Bose’s legal strategy. The 23-month gap between her termination and the filing of the FIR remains the most difficult element to reconcile with her public claims of victimhood.

The silence that lasted nearly two years in Singapore continues to raise more questions than answers.