The Supreme Court on Thursday permitted Bollywood actress Jacqueline Fernandez to withdraw her plea challenging a Delhi court order to frame charges against her in a Rs 200 crore money laundering case. A Bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Joymalya Bagchi noted that counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the special leave petition with liberty to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law. The top court granted the withdrawal with the requested liberty.
Background of the Case
A Delhi court on May 30 ordered framing of charges against Fernandez, alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekar, and 15 others in the case. The actress had moved the Supreme Court against that order. The trial court also directed that charges be framed against Chandrashekar and 20 others for various offences, including under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) provisions, in another case registered by the city police's special cell.
Formal Framing of Charges
On June 3, setting the stage for trial, a Delhi court formally framed charges in the money laundering case. Earlier, on June 11, Supreme Court judge Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra recused himself from hearing the actress' plea. Fernandez, who was summoned by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) several times in connection with the probe, was named an accused for the first time in a supplementary charge sheet filed by the agency.
ED Allegations
The ED alleged in a second supplementary complaint that Fernandez was in constant touch with Chandrashekar and received valuable gifts from him through his associate Pinky Irani. According to the prosecution, Chandrashekar was running an organised criminal network from inside jail and impersonating senior government officials, including those from the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), the Ministry of Home Affairs, and the Ministry of Law and Justice.
Modus Operandi
It claimed that the accused induced complainant Aditi Singh and her family members to part with huge sums of money by using spoofed calls, encrypted applications, and fabricated identities. The ED alleged that Chandrashekar generated proceeds of crime amounting to more than Rs 200 crore through extortion, cheating, impersonation, and criminal intimidation, and thereafter concealed, possessed, transferred, layered, and projected the same as untainted property with the help of his associates.
