A Delhi court on Wednesday formally charged alleged fraudster Sukesh Chandrasekar and Bollywood actress Jacqueline Fernandez with the charges against them. $200 crore money laundering case is under investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
The charges were formally framed by Special Judge Prashant Sharma of the Patiala House Courts against Chandrasekar and Fernandes under Section 3 (Money Laundering) and Section 4 (Punishment) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) after they appeared before the court in response to summons issued against them.
The two defendants pleaded not guilty before the court and demanded a trial. There are 16 other defendants in the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement case. The total number of defendants is 18.
The court also framed charges under Sections 3 (punishment for organized crime) and 4 (punishment for possession of unaccountable wealth) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA) against Chandrasekar and 20 others in a parallel extortion case being investigated by the Delhi Police Crime Branch.
In a closed hearing, Chandrasekar refused to sign the charging documents in the MCOCA case, arguing in court that a supplementary indictment related to the new detainee Mohamed. Navas Ismail, is yet to be filed and the petition seeking postponement of orders against him on this ground is pending before the Delhi High Court.
Co-accused and Sukesh’s wife, Lena Paulouz, who is also a defendant in the money laundering case, signed the MCOCA charging document “under protest,” indicating her disagreement with the charges and maintaining her legal rights to contest the charge or object to the process.
Read also:Delhi court frames charges against Sukesh and Jacqueline Fernandez N $200 crore extortion case
The court on May 30 said that there is sufficient material on record prima facie, raising strong doubts that Chandrashekar committed an offense under Section 3 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act, which is punishable under Section 4 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
The court highlighted 36 crucial pieces of evidence against Chandrashekar, including testimonies, call detail records and conversations recovered from the phones of the complainant and the accused, stating that it “points to the generation of proceeds of crime to the tune of $215 Crores from Aditi Singh and the modus operandi of money laundering.”
The court also held that there was equal prima facie suspicion drawn from the evidence on record against Fernandes.
The judge said her statement under Section 50 of the Narcotics Control Act referred to the fact that she “admitted to contacting Sukesh and receiving gift and money from him”.
The court described the first argument as “baseless”, noting that it is a well-established legal proposition that a person can be charged under the Anti-Money Laundering Law even if he is not accused of the prescribed crime.
After taking cognizance of the gifts arising from the proceeds of crime, the court observed that the said dispute should be decided during the trial.
In the Delhi Police case, on the basis of which the ED had initiated its investigations, the court through a separate order said that there was prima facie suspicion of commission of offenses under the Anti-Corruption Act due to the confessions of Chandrasekar and other co-accused, which is admissible under Section 18 of the Act.
The CEO’s case, based on the Delhi Police MCOCA FIR from August 2021, alleges that Chandrashekar and his associates extorted a sum of money. $200 crore from complainant Singh, wife of former Ranbaxy promoter Shivinder Singh, during 2020 and 2021, and impersonating a senior central government official to arrange her husband’s release on bail.
The federal agency alleged in its indictment that the racketeering funds were laundered through a network of shell companies and transactions, with a portion of the funds allegedly being used to purchase gifts and luxury assets.
The original chargesheet named eight people, including Chandrasekhar as the main accused and the intermediary Pinky Irani, through whom Chandrasekhar communicated with actress Jacqueline Fernandez.
ED named Fernandez as a defendant in a supplemental prosecution complaint filed on August 17, 2022, in which she is accused of possessing the proceeds of crime in the form of various gift items worth more than that. $7 Crores.
Jacqueline’s lawyers have consistently maintained that she was not aware of the criminal activities undertaken by Chandrashekar and therefore there was no criminal intent.
The CEO had earlier this month opposed Fernandez’s request to become an approving authority in the money laundering case, stating that she had actively benefited from the proceeds of crime and was now trying to evade prosecution.
The next date for the prosecution’s evidence hearing is July 14 in the MCOCA case and July 16 in the DG money laundering case.
