If Sharmila claims to have a share in Sakshi, why was she not subject to arrest during YS Jagan Mohan Reddy's imprisonment, which stemmed from allegations of financial misdeeds in the company's accounts?
Sharmila has asserted that Sakshi media targeted her, citing equal ownership in Sakshi with her brother, as their father YSR distributed every property evenly.
However, she has never actively participated in Sakshi's business in the past or present. Her name was never listed among Sakshi's directors at any point in time.
Allegations have surfaced that some businessmen invested in Sakshi as a quid pro quo, a point emphasized by ED and CBI, resulting in filed cases.
If Sharmila indeed holds a share, why has she remained silent on this matter over the years? Is she prepared to engage in the legal battle alongside Jagan as an accused?
Critics argue that Sharmila's approach lacks consideration of different dimensions in the issue and makes mere political statements, ending up as a laughing stock.
Many assert that her actions suggest more vengeance and greed than intelligence and common sense in her political endeavors.