Delhi High Court Dismisses Bollywood Actor Jacqueline Fernandez’s Plea To Quash Rs. 200 Crore Money Laundering Case

The Delhi Excessive Court docket on Thursday dismissed a plea moved by Bollywood actress Jacqueline Fernandez in search of quashing of Rs. 200 crores cash laundering case involving alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar.

Justice Anish Dayal pronounced the order. An in depth order is awaited.

Fernandez’s plea sought quashing of ED’s ECIR in addition to the second supplementary criticism arraigning her because the tenth accused within the case.

In her plea, the actress mentioned that the proof filed by ED would show that she is an “harmless sufferer” of Sukesh Chandrashekhar’s “maliciously focused assault.”

“There may be completely no indication the she had any involvement in any respect in aiding him to launder his purportedly ill-gotten wealth. Therefore, she can’t be prosecuted for the offenses below Part 3, and 4 of the Prevention of Cash Laundering Act 2002,” the plea mentioned.

It added that’s an admitted case of ED that the Tihar jail officers supplied Sukesh Chandrashekhar unrestricted entry to cellphones and different expertise which was utilized by him to con the unique complainant and lots of movie artists together with her with an similar modus operandi.

It was additionally submitted that after ED, in its discretion, has introduced Fernandez as a Prosecution Witness within the predicate offence, it logically follows that any proceedings arising as a consequence of the identical must be quashed.

“The truth that the Petitioner’s assertion has been recorded as a prosecution witness within the predicate offense naturally results in a positive conclusion in her favor. This helps the rivalry that she had no information in any respect of the predicate offense dedicated by the primary accused, Sukesh Chandrashekhar, and his associates,” the plea added.

Moreover, the actress averred that subjecting her to trial for cash laundering primarily based solely on ED’s “unsubstantiated assumptions”, devoid of any concrete documentary proof, is unwarranted and unjust.

“…it’s essential to notice that the Directorate of Enforcement itself makes use of the phrase “may have,” indicating an absence of concrete proof to ascertain that the Petitioner was certainly conscious of Sukesh’s incarceration. Whereas the Petitioner acknowledges that she may have been extra vigilant, this alone doesn’t render her a felony below the Prevention of Cash Laundering Act, 2002,” the plea mentioned.

Title: JACQUELINE FERNANDEZ v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT