High Court directs Delhi Police to file brief reply in Leena Paulose's bail plea in Rs. 200 crore extortion case

Read Time: 07 minutes


The Court was hearing the bail plea filed by Sukesh Chandrashekhar's wife, Leena Paulose, in connection with Rs. 200 crore extortion case registered by the EOW of Delhi Police. 

In the bail plea filed by Sukesh Chandrashekhar's wife, Leena Paulose, in connection with a Rs 200 crore extortion case registered by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Delhi Police against her, the Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Police to file a brief written submission on or before April 6.

During the hearing today, Additional Standing Counsel (ASC) Nandita Rao appearing for the Delhi Police sought an adjournment on behalf of Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain.

On the contrary, appearing for Leena Paulose, Advocate Paul John Edison submitted that there is little urgency in the present case, as her right to motherhood is being violated. He submitted that Leena is already 41 years old.

A bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma noted that the petitioners had already filed their written submissions. The single-judge bench, therefore, directed the Delhi Police to file their brief written submissions not exceeding three pages. Accordingly, the court posted the matter for further hearing on April 6.

It is to be noted that John had earlier contended, “She has been in jail for 16 months and is entitled to the right to life and motherhood”.

On behalf of Leena Paulose, John had submitted that she is a qualified dentist, an Indian Film Actress, paying income tax, and a resident of Delhi. He had added that “Paulose has strong roots in the society “. His primary contention was that six IPC offences alleged against Paulose are bailable and another six are non-bailable, along with Section 3 of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA) and Information Technology Act, registered against her.

The counsel had further submitted that Paulose has been charged with offences under Section 323, 384, 388, 419, 420, 506, 186, 353, 468, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 66D of the Information Technology Act and Section 3 of MCOCA. "I (Paulose) am a lady in my 40s, willing to have a baby and have motherhood, I have a right to life. And my husband is the main accused in the present case", he had contended.

Furthermore, John had contended that in the present case, none of the ingredients of the MCOCA was made against Paulose, and just because her husband (Sukesh Chandrashekhar) is the main accused, that doesn’t mean she can be kept behind bars. He had added that the chargesheet had also been filed in the present case.

On the contrary, the Additional Standing Counsel (ASC) for Delhi Police had submitted that they will have to file a copy of the charge sheet and supplementary charge sheet, because as per Section 21(4) of the MCOCA until the court is sure that no offence is committed, bail cannot be granted.

Notably, on December 12, 2022, a single-judge bench issued a notice to the Delhi Police and sought a reply to the plea.

According to sources, Leena Paulose is a master con woman and strategist, as well as the brains and key factor behind the schemes created to launder the proceeds of crime, were of her husband Sukash Chandrashekar.

Case Title: Leena Paulose v. State of Delhi

Statue: The Constitution of India, The Indian Penal Code, The Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999, The Information Technology Act, and The Code of Criminal Procedure