Bollywood
actress Jacqueline Fernandez has approached the Supreme Court (SC) challenging
the Delhi High Court’s rejection of her plea to quash proceedings in the ?200
crore money laundering case linked to alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar. She
has also sought an interim stay of trial against her.
She
had asked the High Court to quash the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED)
Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) and the second supplementary
complaint that named her as the 10th accused in the case. In her plea, the
actress argued that the evidence filed by the ED would show she is an “innocent
victim” of Sukesh’s “maliciously targeted attack", the news report said.
The plea highlighted that the ED
itself admitted that Tihar jail officials gave Sukesh unrestricted access to
mobile phones and other technology, which he allegedly used to con the original
complainant and several film personalities, including Fernandez, following the
same method. The plea added that since Fernandez was presented as a prosecution
witness in the predicate offence, any subsequent proceedings against her should
logically be quashed.
On July 3, Justice Anish Dayal
dismissed Fernandez’s plea. The court observed that her concern about potential
self-incrimination cannot be a reason to quash the ECIR, as statutory and
constitutional protections already exist to address such issues.
“This
alone cannot assist the petitioner and release her from the yoke of prosecution
under ECIR,” the court said.
The
court further noted that the points raised by Fernandez were subjective and
required a trial to be properly examined. It explained, “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.”
Following
the High Court ruling, Fernandez has now moved the SC.
She
contends that she is a prosecution witness in the predicate offence and that
Sukesh and his aide Pinky Irani tried to mislead her into believing that Sukesh
Chandrasekhar was a successful businessman often targetted politically.
Her
plea states, “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
actress argues that the prosecution material itself shows she lacked mens rea,
as no evidence suggests she had knowledge of the offence.