'Miscarriage Of Justice': ED Opposes Jacqueline Fernandez’s Plea To Turn Approver In Rs 200 Cr Case

Last Updated:May 11, 2026, 14:31 IST

The Enforcement Directorate opposed Jacqueline Fernandez’s plea to turn approver in the Rs 200 crore money laundering case linked to Sukesh Chandrasekhar.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Monday opposed actor Jacqueline Fernandez’s application seeking permission to turn approver in the Rs 200 crore money laundering case linked to alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar, telling a Delhi court that granting her such status would amount to a “miscarriage of justice".

Appearing before the Patiala House Court, the ED argued that Fernandez was not a “minor participant" in the alleged offence, but rather “a significant beneficiary of the proceeds of crime and an active participant in the money laundering scheme under PMLA, 2002".

The agency maintained that her conduct during the investigation was “far from cooperative" and that she failed to make “full and truthful disclosures" in statements recorded under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The ED, in its written reply, stated, “Granting her the position of an Approver in the present case would be a miscarriage of justice and would undermine the gravity of the offence she has committed."

The agency further termed her application “an abuse of the process of law".

ED SAYS ACTOR WAS ‘SIGNIFICANT BENEFICIARY’

According to the ED, Fernandez remained in “regular and sustained contact" with Chandrasekhar even after allegedly becoming aware of his criminal background.

The agency alleged that Chandrasekhar arranged “all benefits, gifts and articles" for the actor out of the proceeds of crime generated through the alleged money laundering activities.

The probe agency contended that this “consistent interaction through numerous ways of communication and receipt of benefits negates any claim of being an ‘unwitting victim’" and instead pointed to her “conscious association with the main perpetrator and with the illicit gains".

The ED also alleged that Fernandez deliberately concealed material facts during questioning.

It claimed that her statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA on multiple dates, including August 30, 2021, October 20, 2021, December 8, 2021, May 20, 2022 and June 27, 2022, were “evasive, contradictory, and incomplete".

According to the agency, she initially withheld or denied details linked to cash transactions, expensive gifts, luxury items, funds transferred to bank accounts, and her alleged association with Pinky Irani and others.

“This deliberate concealment of facts and non-cooperation undermines the very essence of the approver scheme under law, which mandates a full and true disclosure," the ED stated.

COURT SEEKS REJOINDER, POSTS HEARING FOR MAY 12

Additional Sessions Judge Prashant Sharma sought a response from Fernandez’s counsel and granted time for filing a rejoinder to the ED’s reply.

The matter has now been posted for further hearing on May 12.

Fernandez had earlier moved an application through her counsel seeking permission to turn approver in the case.

Her legal team informed the court that she was “ready and willing to turn approver and to cooperate with the investigation".

During earlier proceedings, counsel representing co-accused Sunder Bora argued that notices should be issued to all accused persons in the case since arguments on framing of charges were already underway.

However, Special Public Prosecutor Atul Tripathi opposed the submission, arguing that the matter concerned only the applicant, the investigating agency and the court.

The money laundering case is presently at the stage of arguments on the charge before the trial court.

ED CITES PRIOR COURT ORDERS

The ED also referred to previous judicial proceedings involving Fernandez.

It informed the court that the Delhi High Court had dismissed her plea seeking quashing of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) and the supplementary complaint filed against her.

According to the agency, a subsequent challenge before the Supreme Court was also dismissed.

The Supreme Court, while hearing Fernandez’s plea last year, referred to its ruling in the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case, upholding the ED’s powers under the PMLA.

The court had observed that allegations at the stage of framing of charges must be accepted as they stand.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Fernandez before the Supreme Court, had argued that she could not be prosecuted under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA because she allegedly had no knowledge that the gifts received from Chandrasekhar were proceeds of crime.

CASE CENTRES AROUND ALLEGED RS 200 CRORE EXTORTION

The ED has alleged that Fernandez received luxury gifts worth around Rs 7 crore from Chandrasekhar.

The agency has named her as an accused in a supplementary prosecution complaint filed in the case.

Actor Nora Fatehi, meanwhile, was examined as a witness in the matter.

Investigators have also alleged that Chandrasekhar’s aide Pinky Irani facilitated the delivery of luxury gifts and expensive items to Fernandez.

The larger money laundering case stems from allegations that Chandrasekhar cheated the wives of former Ranbaxy promoters Shivinder Singh and Malvinder Singh of nearly Rs 200 crore.

Fernandez, however, has consistently maintained that she had no role in laundering Chandrasekhar’s alleged illegal wealth and was unaware of the source of funds used for the gifts.

News india 'Miscarriage Of Justice': ED Opposes Jacqueline Fernandez’s Plea To Turn Approver In Rs 200 Cr Case

Read More