Saumya Mishra, a participant on Shark Tank India 3, recently voiced her concerns about the conduct of Peyush Bansal, one of the sharks on the show. Following her emotional distress during a pitch and a disagreement with another shark, Anupam Mittal, Bansal had offered comfort to Mishra, earning him initial praise.
However, Mishra has now come forward with allegations that Bansal exploited her vulnerability for personal gain, rather than offering genuine support. In an interview with a prominent news portal, she expressed disappointment over Bansal’s actions and described his behavior as a strategic move to enhance his public image.
One of the key points of contention raised by Mishra was Bansal’s manipulation of her words. She clarified that she never used the term ‘ladki’ (girl) as attributed to her by Bansal. Instead, she was merely relaying a client’s perspective, referring to therapists as therapists. Mishra felt that Bansal seized upon this phrase to bolster his own brand at her expense.
During the episode, Mishra claimed that Bansal appeared supportive on the surface but was, in fact, the least helpful of all the sharks. She emphasized that while Bansal portrayed himself as providing feedback, his actions were primarily aimed at building his own image, rather than genuinely assisting her.
Furthermore, Mishra expressed dismay over Anupam Mittal’s characterization of her as ‘arrogant’ during her pitch. She felt that the focus shifted away from her business proposal to her character, which could potentially harm her reputation among customers, employees, and friends once the episode aired.
In her statements to the media, Mishra highlighted the selective focus of the sharks on certain words and phrases during her pitch, which she believed were exploited to create a particular narrative. She emphasized that her intention was never to insult anyone and expressed concern about the impact of the episode on her personal and professional life.
Overall, Saumya Mishra’s allegations against Peyush Bansal shed light on the dynamics of reality television and the potential exploitation of participants’ vulnerabilities for personal gain. As the controversy unfolds, it raises important questions about ethics and accountability within such platforms.
