The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Monday opposed actor Jacqueline Fernandes's plea seeking permission to turn approver in the Rs 200 crore money laundering case linked to alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar, telling a Patiala house court that she was non-cooperative and her statements were contradictory and incomplete, as per a report by ANI news agency.
ED's Objections
In its reply filed before the Patiala Court, the ED argued that granting Fernandes approver status would amount to a "miscarriage of justice" and would undermine the seriousness of the offences alleged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. Additional Sessions Judge Prashant Sharma has sought the response of Fernandes's counsel by Tuesday.
Fernandes had moved an application seeking to become an approver in the case, stating that she was ready to cooperate with the investigation. However, the ED opposed the plea, saying that her conduct during the probe had been evasive and non-cooperative.
Allegations of Non-Disclosure
In its reply, the ED alleged that Fernandes failed to make "full and truthful disclosures" in several statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA between August 2021 and June 2022. The statements, according to the agency, were "evasive, contradictory and incomplete", forcing investigators to repeatedly confront her with documentary evidence, according to the ANI report. According to the agency, Fernandes remained in regular contact with Chandrasekhar despite allegedly being aware of his criminal background.
Gifts and Communication
The ED alleged that Chandrasekhar arranged expensive gifts and luxury articles for the actor using proceeds generated through criminal activities. The agency further claimed that the repeated communication between the two and Fernandes's acceptance of gifts contradicted her claim of being an "unwitting victim" in the case.
The agency also added that Fernandes initially concealed material facts relating to cash transactions, costly gifts, luxury items and her links with alleged intermediary Pinki Irani and others.
"It is further evident that the applicant was well aware of the criminal antecedents of the main accused, yet she chose to continue her association and accept valuable benefits," the agency stated in its submission.
Legal Background
The probe agency added that Fernandes's statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC and her claim of being a cooperating witness in the predicate offence did not absolve her of liability in the separate offence of money laundering under the PMLA.
Fernandes had earlier challenged the ECIR and supplementary complaint filed against her before the Delhi high court, which dismissed her plea. Her subsequent appeal before the Supreme Court was also dismissed.
The money laundering case is currently at the stage of arguments on charge before the trial court.
