教授，博士生導師。復旦大學中國反洗錢研究中心首任主任，復旦大學俄...
復旦大學國際金融學院教授，中國反洗錢研究中心執行主任，陸家嘴金...
復旦大學法學院教授、博士生導師；復旦大學國際刑法研究中心主任。...
華東政法大學刑法學教授，復旦大學中國反洗錢研究中心特聘研究員，荷...
安永金融服務風險管理、咨詢總監，曾任螞蟻金服反洗錢總監，復旦大學...
周錦賢先生，香港人，廣州暨南大學法律學士，復旦大學中國反洗錢研究中...
高級經濟師，復旦大學金融學博士，復旦大學經濟學博士后。現供職于中...
武漢中南財經政法大學信息安全學院教授。長期專注于反洗錢/反恐...
生辰：1977.7.26 籍貫：遼寧撫順 民族：漢 黨派：九三學社 職稱：教授 研究...
祝亞雄，1974年生，浙江衢州人。浙江師范大學經濟與管理學院副教授，博...
復旦大學中國反洗錢研究中心特聘研究員；現任安永管理咨詢服務合伙...
工作履歷：曾在國家審計署從事審計工作，是國家第一批政府審計師；曾在...
On Wednesday, a Delhi Court heard arguments from Bollywood actress Jacqueline Fernandez’s lawyer in a case related to money laundering involving conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar. This case is about a Rs 200 crore (Rs 200 crore) money laundering scheme, where Jacqueline is accused of receiving expensive gifts that were allegedly part of the proceeds of crime. Her lawyers have challenged the charges in the case, arguing that Jacqueline was unaware of the illegal source of the gifts she received.
Jacqueline’s lawyer argued in court that she did not know that the gifts given to her by Sukesh Chandrasekhar came from a crime. According to her legal team, the actress was not involved in the illegal activity and did not know that the gifts were part of the money that Sukesh allegedly extorted from Aditi Singh. The lawyer further claimed that there was no evidence to suggest that Jacqueline was aware of the criminal origins of the gifts.
During the court session, Justice Anish Dayal asked whether it is the responsibility of an adult person to check the source of the gifts they receive. This question is important because it could help decide whether Jacqueline should have known the gifts were linked to a crime. The next hearing in this case is scheduled for November 26, when the court will hear more arguments.
Siddharth Agrawal, the senior lawyer representing Jacqueline, argued that there was no crime committed by her because she did not knowingly receive proceeds from illegal activities. He explained that although Jacqueline did see a newspaper article in 2019 about Sukesh Chandrasekhar, she did not take the article seriously or investigate further. He also pointed out that there is no legal requirement for Jacqueline to have verified the information in the article.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED), which is investigating the case, has claimed that Jacqueline should have been aware of the criminal nature of the gifts she received. The ED alleges that she failed to investigate the source of the gifts, and by doing so, she may have been involved in the crime. However, Jacqueline’s lawyer argued that she was misled by Sukesh’s associate, Pinky Irani, who convinced her that Sukesh had powerful political connections. He suggested that Jacqueline was unaware of Sukesh’s criminal background and had stopped communicating with him after seeing the article.
The lawyer also emphasized that Jacqueline never directly asked for the gifts and did not knowingly participate in any illegal activities. The defense argued that Jacqueline is being made a scapegoat because of Sukesh’s political connections, and that she was simply misled by him and his associates.
Meanwhile, Sukesh Chandrasekhar, who is currently in jail on charges of extorting Rs 200 crore, sent a handwritten letter to congratulate Donald Trump on his victory in the US presidential election. In this letter, Sukesh also mentioned his relationship with Jacqueline and expressed his plans to invest Rs 1130 crore (about $135 million) into a Los Angeles studio, which he claimed would be dedicated to her.