Makoka Money‑Laundering Case: Court Defers Request to Add Actress as Accused

New Delhi, September 15 – The Rauz Avenue Court has delayed a ruling on a request that actress Jacqueline Fernandez be named an accused in the Makoka money‑laundering investigation, opting to preserve its earlier order.

The matter arose after the court asked the Delhi Police’s Economic Crimes Division for a formal reply on September 7 regarding the petition. At present, the police have not designated Fernandez as an accused in the Makoka case, though she remains a suspect in a separate ₹200 crore laundering case that saw charges framed in May 2026.

The Makoka case traces its origins to alleged forced‑recovery operations linked to Sukesh Chandrasekhar. According to police, Sukesh, while serving time, presented himself as a high‑ranking government officer and persuaded Aditi Singh – the spouse of former promoter Shivinder Singh – to part with a large sum, promising legal aid and facilitation of his release.

Investigations uncovered a structured criminal network operating from inside the jail, with multiple individuals implicated. The Economic Enforcement Directorate (ED) later added money‑laundering charges, asserting that the proceeds financed luxury purchases and other expenditures. The ED’s report claimed that Fernandez received costly gifts and enjoyed advantages derived from the illicit money, allegations the actress has consistently denied, describing herself as an unwitting victim.

In July 2025, the Delhi High Court dismissed her petition to stay the ED’s action, noting that a determination of guilt would be made during trial based on evidence. The Patiala House Court’s May 2026 order to frame charges against Fernandez, Sukesh, and others further intensified the legal proceedings. Fernandez also approached the Supreme Court for interim relief but withdrew the petition in June 2026, electing a different legal pathway.

The Rauz Avenue Court’s decision to retain its earlier order means the request to add the actress as an accused in the Makoka case will be examined later, keeping the issue in legal limbo.