Actress Jacqueline Fernandez Moves Supreme Court For Quashing Of 200 Cr-Money Laundering Case Involving Sukesh Chandrashekhar

Bollywood actress Jacqueline Fernandez has moved the Supreme Court challenging Delhi High Court's dismissal of her quashing plea in the 200 cr-money laundering case involving alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar. As an interim measure, the actress prays for stay of trial qua her.

To recap, Fernandez's plea before the High Court sought quashing of ED's ECIR as well as the second supplementary complaint arraigning her as the tenth accused in the case. In her plea, the actress said that the evidence filed by ED would prove that she is an “innocent victim” of Sukesh's “maliciously targeted attack.”

It added that was an admitted case of ED that the Tihar jail officials provided Sukesh unrestricted access to mobile phones and other technology which was used by him to con the original complainant and many film artists including her with an identical modus operandi. It was also submitted that once ED, in its discretion, had presented Fernandez as a prosecution witness in the predicate offence, it logically followed that any proceedings arising as a consequence of the same should be quashed.

However, on July 3, Justice Anish Dayal dismissed the actress' plea, observing that her apprehension that any evidence would be self-incriminating cannot lead to quashing of the ECIR as statutory and constitutional protections are already provided and will have to be assessed in that rubric.

This alone cannot assist the petitioner and release her from the yoke of prosecution under ECIR, the Court said. 

It observed that all the aspects pleaded in the case put by the actress were subjective issues which require to be established through trial. “Attribution of knowledge for the purposes of PMLA implication may potentially bring in its fold the full range, spectrum and degrees of “knowing”. For example, whether turning a blind eye to an obvious fact or disturbing news or a critical disclosure of illegality, would amount to “knowing” or not is a matter that, in this Court's opinion, can be determined post-trial, when the Court has all strands of evidence for appreciation."

Aggrieved, Fernandez approached the Supreme Court.

Among other things, the actress contends that she is a prosecution witness in the predicate offense and that Sukesh and his aide Pinky Irani made several efforts to dupe her into believing that Sukesh was a successful businessman who was often politically targeted. "the Petitioner cannot be summoned to suffer trial for an offence u/S.3 of PMLA in the absence of any admissible evidence to indicate her positive knowledge that the gifts given to her were derived from any criminal activity", the plea states.

It is contended that the prosecution material itself is sufficient to establish lack of mens rea on the petitioner's part, as no positive evidence has been brought forth to indicate that she had knowledge of the scheduled offence.

The petition has been filed through AoR Sumeer Sodhi.

Case Title: Jacqueline Fernandez v. Directorate of Enforcement, SLP (CRL.) NO. 14759/2025