Delhi court grants bail to conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar in Rs 200 cr extortion case; cites right to speedy trial
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Tuesday granted bail to alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar in the Rs 200 crore extortion-linked money laundering case , observing that continued incarceration beyond a reasonable period violates the fundamental right to personal liberty and speedy trial.
In its order, the court directed that Chandrashekhar be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh along with sureties of the like amount.
The court also imposed several conditions, restraining him from contacting or influencing witnesses, requiring him to provide his address and mobile number to the investigating officer, surrender his passport, and not leave the country without prior permission.
The case is currently at the stage of arguments on charges before the trial court. Chandrashekhar, his wife Leena Maria Paul and the other accused are facing charges under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) as well as in the extortion and related money laundering case. According to the police, multiple FIRs have also been registered against Leena.
Meanwhile, Delhi Police in March opposed Leena Maria Paul’s bail plea, arguing that the delay in trial has been caused by the accused persons. It was also submitted that Leena Maria is a co-head of an organised crime syndicate allegedly led by her husband, Sukesh Chandrashekhar.
Justice Prateek Jalan heard the matter and posted it for rebuttal arguments by Leena’s counsel on March 28, after Delhi Police concluded its submissions.
Appearing for the police, senior advocate Sanjay Jain, along with advocate Akhand Pratap Singh, argued that repeated adjournments sought by the accused before the trial court have contributed significantly to the delay. He also alleged that Chandrashekhar managed to secure an entire jail ward during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Leena has sought bail on the grounds of prolonged custody, parity with co-accused, and provisions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) applicable to women. She has been in custody for over three years and seven months. Her bail pleas have been pending since 2024, following directions from the Supreme Court to expedite the matter.
Representing Leena, advocates Anant Malik and John Paul Edison argued that charges are yet to be framed despite the lengthy custody period. They also pointed out that several co-accused, including actress Jacqueline Fernandez, Pradeep Ramdani, Avtar Singh Kochar, and Pinki Irani, have been granted bail, and in Fernandez’s case, she was not even arrested during the investigation.
The defence further cited the proviso under Section 45 of the PMLA, which allows relaxation of bail conditions for women. However, the Enforcement Directorate opposed the plea, contending that the twin conditions under Section 45 remain applicable and that the conduct of the accused must also be considered while deciding bail.
In its order, the court directed that Chandrashekhar be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh along with sureties of the like amount.
The court also imposed several conditions, restraining him from contacting or influencing witnesses, requiring him to provide his address and mobile number to the investigating officer, surrender his passport, and not leave the country without prior permission.
The case is currently at the stage of arguments on charges before the trial court. Chandrashekhar, his wife Leena Maria Paul and the other accused are facing charges under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) as well as in the extortion and related money laundering case. According to the police, multiple FIRs have also been registered against Leena.
Meanwhile, Delhi Police in March opposed Leena Maria Paul’s bail plea, arguing that the delay in trial has been caused by the accused persons. It was also submitted that Leena Maria is a co-head of an organised crime syndicate allegedly led by her husband, Sukesh Chandrashekhar.
Justice Prateek Jalan heard the matter and posted it for rebuttal arguments by Leena’s counsel on March 28, after Delhi Police concluded its submissions.
Appearing for the police, senior advocate Sanjay Jain, along with advocate Akhand Pratap Singh, argued that repeated adjournments sought by the accused before the trial court have contributed significantly to the delay. He also alleged that Chandrashekhar managed to secure an entire jail ward during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Leena has sought bail on the grounds of prolonged custody, parity with co-accused, and provisions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) applicable to women. She has been in custody for over three years and seven months. Her bail pleas have been pending since 2024, following directions from the Supreme Court to expedite the matter.
Representing Leena, advocates Anant Malik and John Paul Edison argued that charges are yet to be framed despite the lengthy custody period. They also pointed out that several co-accused, including actress Jacqueline Fernandez, Pradeep Ramdani, Avtar Singh Kochar, and Pinki Irani, have been granted bail, and in Fernandez’s case, she was not even arrested during the investigation.
The defence further cited the proviso under Section 45 of the PMLA, which allows relaxation of bail conditions for women. However, the Enforcement Directorate opposed the plea, contending that the twin conditions under Section 45 remain applicable and that the conduct of the accused must also be considered while deciding bail.
Next Story