ED opposes Jacqueline Fernandez’s plea to turn approver in money laundering case

The court has set the next date of hearing for May 12 after Fernandez’s counsel sought time to seek instructions

The Enforcement Directorate on Monday opposed Bollywood actor Jacqueline Fernandez’s plea seeking to be an approver in the money laundering case against Sukesh Chandrasekhar, stating that the actress had actively benefited from the proceeds of crime and was now attempting to escape prosecution.

The federal agency told special judge that Fernandez was not an “unwitting victim” as she claimed in her plea. (Jacqueline Fernandez Facebook page)

The federal agency told special judge Prashant Sharma of Patiala House courts that Fernandez was not an “unwitting victim” as she claimed in her plea, and remained in constant touch with Chandrasekhar despite being aware of his criminal antecedents. They added that Fernandez was an active recipient of all the gifts arranged by Chandrasekar for her out of the proceeds of crime.

The response stated, “This consistent interaction through numerous ways of communication and receipt of benefits negates any claim of an unwitting victim and instead highlights her conscious association with the main perpetrator and with the illicit gains”.

The agency said that Fernandez’s conduct during the investigation had been far from cooperative as she consistently failed to make full and truthful disclosures in her statements to ED and had been evasive and contradictory in her responses.

Special Prosecutor Atul Tripathi said that while the primary objective of making an accused an approver is to secure evidence from a less culpable accused to prosecute more culpable ones, the applicant’s role was not that of a minor participant but of a significant beneficiary of the proceeds of crime.

“Granting her the position of an approver in the present case would be a miscarriage of justice and would undermine the gravity of offence she has committed,” the ED said.

Stating that the application was “nothing but an abuse of the process of law”, which was filed with the sole intention of “circumventing the legal process and escaping prosecution” rather than being a cooperating witness.

The court has set the next date of hearing for May 1 after Fernandez’s counsel sought time to seek instructions.

Fernandez had last month moved a Delhi court, seeking to become an approver in the ₹200 crore money laundering case.

If allowed, Fernandez would become a prosecution witness and would be mandated to disclose all facts regarding the case and co-accused, in favour of a pardon or a lesser punishment.

To be sure, the trial in the matter is yet to begin and the case is currently at the stage of arguments on the point of charge.

The ED’s case, based on a Delhi Police first information report (FIR) from August 2021, alleges that Chandrashekhar and his associates extorted an amount of ₹200 crore from complainant Aditi Singh, wife of former Ranbaxy promoter Shivender Singh, during the years 2020 and 2021, impersonating as a top central government official to arrange for her husband’s release on bail.

ED named Fernandez as an accused in its supplementary prosecution complaint of August 17, 2022, wherein she was accused of being in possession of proceeds of crime worth over ₹7 crore in the form of various gifted articles.

Jacqueline’s counsels have consistently maintained that she was not aware of the criminal activities of Chandrasekhar and hence there was absence of any criminal intent.

The federal agency said in its charge sheet that the extorted money was laundered through a network of shell companies and transactions with a portion of money purportedly being used to buy luxury gifts and assets.

While the original charge sheet named eight people, including Chandrasekhar as the prime accused and intermediary Pinky Irani, through whom Chandrasekhar got in touch with the actress, Jacqueline’s name put the total number of accused to nine.

Jacqueline was granted bail in the case in 2022, after the court noted that it is yet to be examined whether she had knowledge, intention or connection of Chandrasekhar giving her those gifts out of the proceeds of crime.

The Delhi Police case, lodged under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA), is being investigated by the Delhi Police Special Cell.

Of a total of 31 cases against him, Chandrasekhar has so far secured bail in 27 cases, with the remaining including the present extortion case and the money laundering probe arising out of it.