The Delhi High Court on Friday, 31 July issued notice to the Delhi Police on a petition filed by alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar challenging a trial court order that directed framing of charges against him in the ₹200 crore extortion case registered under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA). A single-judge bench of Justice Madhu Jain sought the police's response and scheduled the next hearing for 23 September.

What Chandrashekhar's Plea Argues

Chandrashekhar has challenged the trial court's order dated 30 May, formally signed on 3 June, contending that it mechanically accepted the prosecution's case without independently examining whether the material on record disclosed the essential ingredients of MCOCA offences. In his appeal, he argued that the trial court acted as a 'post office' — merely endorsing the prosecution's position and deferring every defence objection to the trial stage.

The petition further contends that the trial court failed to examine whether an organised crime syndicate, as required under MCOCA, was actually established on the record. Chandrashekhar has also argued that the prosecution itself treats the present case as the first alleged offence of the purported syndicate, meaning the statutory threshold for invoking MCOCA was not met.

Additional Grounds Raised

The appeal flags several procedural concerns: the trial court allegedly failed to scrutinise statutory approvals and sanctions obtained by the prosecution, ignored contradictions between the versions put forward by the Delhi Police and the Enforcement Directorate (ED), and overlooked the fact that a supplementary chargesheet was still proposed to be filed even as charges were being framed.

Chandrashekhar has also questioned the simultaneous invocation of cheating offences under Sections 419 and 420 of the IPC alongside Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, and argued that the trial court inadequately considered the complainant's role and the surrounding circumstances before directing charge framing.

Charges Framed Against Chandrashekhar

The charges directed against him span Sections 170, 384, 386, 388, 419, 420, 506 and 120B of the IPC, Section 66D of the IT Act, and Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(3), 3(4), 3(5) and 4 of the MCOCA. The underlying MCOCA case stems from an FIR registered by the Delhi Police Special Cell in August 2021, alleging that Chandrashekhar and associates extorted around ₹217 crore from the wife of a businessman by falsely promising to secure legal relief for her husband. According to the prosecution, the alleged extortion syndicate was operated by Chandrashekhar from jail with the help of associates and corrupt prison officials.

Where Related Proceedings Stand

The Delhi High Court has handled several connected matters in recent months. Earlier this month, it granted regular bail to advocate B. Mohanraj, a co-accused, holding that his continued detention as an undertrial was unwarranted after nearly five years in custody — particularly given a trial involving 24 accused, 403 prosecution witnesses, and chargesheets exceeding 10,000 pages that is unlikely to conclude within a reasonable time.

The court had previously refused regular bail to Chandrashekhar's wife, Leena Maria Paul, in the MCOCA case, finding that material on record prima facie indicated her involvement in the alleged organised crime syndicate. The Supreme Court subsequently issued notice to the Delhi Police on her challenge to that bail rejection.

Both Chandrashekhar and Paul have, however, secured bail in the parallel money laundering proceedings initiated by the ED. In Chandrashekhar's case, the trial court granted bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), holding that he had remained in custody for more than half the maximum prescribed sentence and that continued incarceration would violate his right to personal liberty, given that both the predicate offence and PMLA proceedings had remained stayed for years.

Separately, Bollywood actor Jacqueline Fernandez last month pleaded not guilty before a Delhi court in the ₹200 crore money laundering case linked to Chandrashekhar and expressed her willingness to face trial. The court also framed money laundering charges against Chandrashekhar, Paul, and 14 others, all of whom denied the allegations. The Delhi High Court's next hearing on Chandrashekhar's MCOCA plea is set for 23 September.