Jacqueline Fernandez Moves Delhi Court To Turn Approver In ₹200 Crore PMLA Case; ED Response Sought
Jacqueline Fernandez during court proceedings in Rs 200 crore money laundering case linked to Sukesh Chandrasekhar
A Delhi court on Friday issued notice on a plea filed by Bollywood actor Jacqueline Fernandez seeking to turn approver in the ₹200 crore money laundering case involving alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Prashant Sharma at the Patiala House Courts sought a response from the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) and listed the matter for hearing on April 28.
Fernandez has been summoned multiple times during the investigation and was named as a co-accused for the first time in a supplementary chargesheet filed by the ED. She has been arrayed as the tenth accused in the case.
The development comes after a series of legal setbacks for the actor. In July last year, the Delhi High Court dismissed her plea seeking quashing of the proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The High Court had observed that her apprehension regarding self-incrimination could not be a ground to quash the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR), noting that statutory and constitutional safeguards were already in place.
Subsequently, in September, the Supreme Court declined to entertain her Special Leave Petition challenging the High Court’s order, while granting her liberty to raise appropriate pleas at a later stage.
In her present application, Fernandez has contended that the evidence collected by the ED demonstrates that she is an “innocent victim” of what she describes as a “maliciously targeted attack” orchestrated by Chandrasekhar. She has pointed out that, according to the agency’s own case, Chandrasekhar operated from inside Tihar Jail with alleged assistance from jail officials, gaining unrestricted access to communication devices to defraud multiple individuals, including film personalities.
Fernandez has further argued that she was misled into believing that Chandrasekhar was a legitimate and influential businessman who was being politically targeted. She has also relied on the ED’s stance in the predicate offence, where she was cited as a prosecution witness, to contend that the continuation of proceedings against her is legally untenable.
According to her submissions, once she has been treated as a witness in the underlying offence, the continuation of money laundering proceedings arising from the same set of facts is contradictory.
The case pertains to allegations that Chandrasekhar, along with his associates, orchestrated a large-scale extortion racket, duping high-profile individuals and laundering proceeds of crime. The ED has alleged that several expensive gifts and financial benefits were extended to Fernandez from the proceeds of the alleged crime.
In a related news, a Delhi court has recently granted bail to alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar in a money laundering case, holding that prolonged incarceration without progress in trial violates the fundamental right to personal liberty and speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Notably, the Rouse Avenue Court, in August 2024 had granted bail to Sukesh Chandrashekhar citing "any interpretation which defeats the pre-eminence of bail over jail should be avoided”.
Sukesh Chandrashekar, facing 34 criminal cases, was accused of orchestrating an INR 215 crore heist while being imprisoned by deceiving Shivinder Mohan Singh of Ranbaxy. The Supreme Court ordered his transfer from Tihar Jail to Mandoli Jail, following his plea citing threats to his life. Chandrashekar's lawyer claimed extortion in jail, while ASG SV Raju noted that the accused was unable to continue his criminal activities due to the transfer of supportive officials.
Bench: Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Prashant Sharma
Hearing Date: April 17, 2026