Actor Jacqueline Fernandez on Monday failed to secure relief from the Supreme Court, which declined to interfere with a Delhi High Court order rejecting her plea to quash an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) in the Rs 200 crore money laundering case involving alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih told senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Fernandez, “You withdraw this. Come at an appropriate stage. That would be the better option. We will not interfere at this stage.” The matter was dismissed with liberty to approach the court later.
Fernandez had challenged the Delhi High Court’s July 3 order that dismissed her petition against the ECIR. The actor is named as an accused in the case against Chandrasekhar, who allegedly duped the spouses of Ranbaxy’s former promoters, Shivinder and Malvinder Singh, of Rs 200 crore.
Rohatgi argued that Fernandez had no role in laundering money and was only at the receiving end of Chandrasekhar’s gifts, worth at least Rs 5.71 crore. He maintained that the conman, already jailed, was “infatuated” with the film star and impersonated senior government officials to deceive victims.
The Enforcement Directorate, however, has alleged that Fernandez knowingly accepted gifts despite being aware of Chandrasekhar’s criminal background. The Delhi High Court had earlier refused to quash the charges, noting that peaceful protest rights and criminal liability under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) must be assessed at the stage of framing charges.
The Supreme Court bench cited its earlier Vijay Madanlal Choudhary ruling upholding ED’s powers under the PMLA, observing that allegations at the charge stage have to be accepted. Rohatgi requested that high court remarks not prejudice Fernandez during trial, to which the bench clarified that the observations were limited to dismissal of her plea.
The Enforcement Directorate has filed multiple chargesheets against Chandrasekhar and his wife, Leena Paulose, accusing them of using hawala routes and shell companies to launder the proceeds of crime. Both were earlier arrested under provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).
