New Delhi: The Enforcement Directorate on May 11, 2026 opposed Bollywood actor Jacqueline Fernandez’s application seeking approver status in the Rs. 200 crore money laundering case in which alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar is the main accused, contending that her role was not that of a minor participant but of a significant beneficiary of the proceeds of crime and an active participant in the money laundering scheme.
Additional Sessions Judge Prashant Sharma of the Patiala House Court asked Fernandez to respond to the ED’s opposition and listed the matter for further consideration on May 12, 2026.
Fernandez had moved the application last month seeking to be granted approver status in the case. She was arraigned as an accused in a second supplementary prosecution complaint filed by the ED on August 17, 2022, after not being named in the initial prosecution complaint filed against eight accused in December 2021. A High Court challenge seeking quashing of the case against her was rejected in July last year.
In its opposition, the ED argued that Fernandez had remained in “regular and sustained” contact with Chandrashekhar even after becoming aware of his criminal antecedents, and that making her an approver would amount to a miscarriage of justice and undermine the gravity of the offence committed. The agency contended that Chandrashekhar had carefully arranged all benefits, gifts, and articles received by Fernandez out of the proceeds of crime involved in the money laundering offence.
Directly addressing Fernandez’s claim of being a victim, the ED stated that “the applicant was well aware of the criminal antecedents of the main accused, i.e. Sukesh Chandrashekhar” and that “despite this knowledge of his real identity and criminal background, she chose to continue her association and accept valuable benefits, possess, receive, use and enjoy the proceeds of crime for herself and her family member, thereby demonstrating a conscious disregard for the source of funds and actively participating in the laundering process.” The agency stated that her claim of being a victim was “therefore self-serving and contrary to the evidence on record.”
The ED further contended that Fernandez’s conduct during the investigation had been far from cooperative, alleging that she consistently failed to make full and truthful disclosures in her statements recorded on five occasions under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Chandrashekhar is accused of posing as a high-level government official acting on behalf of the Prime Minister’s Office and the Union Home Minister to dupe businesswoman Aditi Singh of nearly Rs. 200 crore over a span of seven to eight months. Fernandez was allegedly implicated in the case on the ground that she received expensive gifts from Chandrashekhar, who was reportedly her boyfriend at the relevant time.
Case Details: Enforcement Directorate v. Sukesh Chandrashekhar and Others, Patiala House Court, New Delhi. Before Additional Sessions Judge Prashant Sharma. Hearing dated May 11, 2026. Next date of hearing: May 12, 2026.
![Calcutta High Court judge directs Supreme Court's Secy Gen to produce transcripts of his interview [Read Order]](/secure/uploads/2023/04/lj_1579_7e4dbb08-78fb-4ca1-9c70-c7173a6c80a9.jpg)
