[ad_1]
The Delhi Excessive Court docket Thursday sought the Enforcement Directorate’s stand in actress Jacqueline Fernandez’s plea looking for quashing of the company’s August 8, 2021 grievance, August 2022 second supplementary grievance and all proceedings emanating from it in a Rs 200 crore cash laundering case involving alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar.
A single-judge bench of Justice Jyoti Singh issued discover to the ED asking the company to file its response and listed the matter on January 29, 2024.
Showing for ED, advocate Zoheb Hossain questioned the maintainability of the petition and mentioned that there’s already a cognizance order, including the matter is fastened for arguments on cost in February subsequent 12 months.
“When there’s an order and cognizance is taken by particular court docket, even assuming the order is a nullity, the legislation is that it must be challenged in accordance with legislation. Immediately, a particular court docket has taken a view that prima facie a case is made out and is match to be proceeded with. Immediately, there is no such thing as a problem to the order of cognizance and solely problem to the grievance. With out problem to cognizance order, the problem to the grievance alone is probably not maintainable,” he mentioned.
In the meantime, showing for Fernandez, senior advocate Siddharth Agarwal argued that his shopper has challenged the ECIR (Enforcement Case Info Report) “qua her (within the capability of)” and the secondary supplementary grievance and proceedings emanating from it.
Agarwal mentioned, “I’m not difficult the bigger case. My prayer covers any order that has been handed as regards to me being implicated within the prison proceedings within the case. The order of cognizance has nothing to do with me, it’s previous to me being made an accused. I’ve challenged the implication of me being an accused within the current proceedings.”
Fernandez was added as an accused within the ED’s second supplementary grievance and on September 1, 2022, a particular court docket had summoned Fernandez to look earlier than it. On September 26, 2022, she appeared earlier than the court docket and moved an interim bail plea, which was granted.
Agarwal additional mentioned that his shopper can’t be made an accused within the PMLA case and that she was a witness within the predicate offence registered by the Particular Cell, Delhi police in 2021 whereby Aditi Singh, spouse of former Fortis Healthcare promoter Shivender Singh, lodged a grievance, alleging that she was duped by Chandrashekhar who extorted Rs 200 crore from her underneath the pretext of securing bail for her husband.
A case of extortion and impersonation was registered with the Particular Cell and later, the case was transferred to the EOW (Financial Offence Wing). Extra arrests have been made together with of Rohini jail officers, and sections of the stringent Maharashtra Management of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) have been added.
“There are seven others who’ve acquired items however are made witnesses. However ED says that you simply (Fernandez) are in some way particular as a result of in February 2021, you acquired info within the type of an article that in 2017 there was some case in opposition to this man so that you should have recognized that Sukesh is a prison,” Aggarwal submitted.
To this, Hossain responded that these articles are relied-upon paperwork within the prosecution grievance. He additional submitted that round Rs 1.26 crore acquired transferred to Fernandez’s sister a lot after she found Chandrashekhar’s antecedents. Additionally items to the tune of Rs 7.12 crore from February 2021 to June 2021 got to the petitioner, he mentioned. Hossain additional mentioned Fernandez being a witness within the predicate offence makes no distinction to the offence of cash laundering underneath PMLA (Prevention of Cash Laundering Act).
Fernandez, in her plea, has claimed that nowhere does the prosecution grievance allege that the petitioner had data of the “nefarious actions” of accused no. 1 (Chandrashekhar) in extorting cash from Aditi Singh. The plea said that the “EOW has not solely discovered the petitioner harmless however has additionally gone to the extent of enlisting her as a prosecution witness”. Fernandez has mentioned that she is an “harmless sufferer” of Chandrashekhar’s assault, and that there was no indication that she was concerned in aiding him to launder his purportedly ill-gotten cash.
[ad_2]
Source link
