New Delhi. Actress Jacqueline Fernandez seems to be entangled in the money laundering case of gangster Sukesh Chandrashekhar. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has made many serious new claims before the court regarding the actress, which has increased the troubles of Jacqueline Fernandez. In its new claims, ED told the Delhi High Court that Jacqueline Fernandez was knowingly accepting the money defrauded by conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar and was using the money from this crime for her own fun and enjoyment. So let us tell in detail…
ED has given these arguments before the court in an affidavit filed in response to a petition filed by Jacqueline Fernandez. Let us tell you that in the petition, the actress had demanded cancellation of the FIR lodged against her in the case of fraud of Rs 200 crore allegedly related to Sukesh Chandrashekhar. Now in this new report of ED, ED has given new arguments before the High Court. In which it is said that Jacqueline Fernandez was knowingly involved in the possession and utilization of the proceeds of crime of Sukesh.
ED accused the actress of destroying evidence
According to reports, the ED filed an affidavit in response to Jacqueline Fernandez’s petition, stating that Jacqueline Fernandez never disclosed the truth about her financial transactions with Sukesh Chandrashekhar. According to ED, Jacqueline (Jacqueline Fernandez) had also tried to tamper with the evidence by erasing all the data from her mobile phone after the arrest of Sukesh Chandrashekhar.
ED also said that- “The actress also asked her associates to destroy the evidence. The evidence proves beyond doubt that she was enjoying, using the money and earning the proceeds of crime. Thus, it has been proved that Jacqueline Fernandez was knowingly involved in the possession and utilization of the proceeds of crime of accused Chandrashekhar.
Now hearing will be held on April 15
Let us tell you that this case was listed in the court of Judge Manoj Kumar Ohri. The lawyer representing Jacqueline Fernandez sought time to file a reply to the ED’s affidavit. The high court listed the case for further hearing on April 15.