Liberty Over Lockup: Delhi Court Frees Sukesh Chandrashekar in PMLA Bribery Case After 4 Years

In a stinging rebuke to prolonged pre-trial detention, Special Judge Dr. Vishal Gogne of the Rouse Avenue District Court granted regular bail to alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekar in a high-profile money laundering case filed by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) . The decision, invoking Section 479(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) , came after Sukesh had spent over four years in custody—more than half the maximum seven-year sentence under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) . The court dismissed ED's objections, rooted in Sukesh's involvement in 30 other cases, prioritizing constitutional liberty under Article 21 .

Roots in a Political Symbol Heist

The saga traces back to 2017, post the death of Tamil Nadu CM J. Jayalalithaa , when the AIADMK splintered into factions led by T.T.V. Dhinakaran (Sasikala camp) and E. Madhusudhanan . Both vied for the party's coveted 'Two Leaves' election symbol before the Election Commission of India (ECI) .

Enter Sukesh Chandrashekar, accused of conspiring with Dhinakaran, T.P. Mallikarjun , and others to bribe ECI officials with Rs 50 crore for a favorable ruling—and to schedule bypolls in Dr. Radhakrishnan Nagar on Dhinakaran's "auspicious" date, May 5, 2017. Police raided Sukesh's suite at Hyatt Regency, Delhi , recovering Rs 1.3 crore in cash (part of Rs 2 crore allegedly hawala-routed from Chennai), a Mercedes with fake "Member of Parliament" stickers, and forged Rajya Sabha ID. Charges stemmed from FIR No. 56/2017 under IPC sections for cheating, forgery, criminal conspiracy, and Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act .

ED's PMLA complaint alleged Sukesh laundered these "proceeds of crime," projecting tainted Rs 63.78 lakh as untainted via payments to associates and the hotel. Trials in both the predicate offence and PMLA case stand stayed—predicate since 2019 (mid-prosecution evidence), PMLA since February 2024 (defence evidence stage).

Defence's Time-Served Trump Card vs ED's Multi-Case Firewall

Sukesh's counsel zeroed in on Section 479(1) BNSS , arguing mandatory bail after half the maximum term, bolstered by Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary (2022) and Ajay Ajit Peter Kerkar (2024) applying it to PMLA, plus Satender Kumar Antil on its imperative nature. With no trial resumption in sight and prior bail in the predicate case (August 30, 2024) after full seven-year detention, they invoked Article 21 against indefinite incarceration.

ED fired back fiercely: Bail is discretionary, not indefeasible, per Vijay Madanlal ; Section 479(2) BNSS bars release amid multiple cases (Sukesh faces 31); precedents like Sunil Maan (2025) , Nitesh Raghunath Lahange (2025) , and Panna Lal Mahto (2024) demand case-by-case scrutiny. Bail in predicate doesn't auto-extend to PMLA ( Aditya Krishna, 2025 ), they urged.

Judging Liberty in PMLA's Shadow

Judge Gogne dissected Section 479 BNSS : Its "shall" mandates bail post-half-term detention (barring provisos), tempered but not overridden by sub-section (2) on multiple cases. Echoing Vijay Madanlal , he mandated a "case-to-case" lens, rejecting ED's blanket bar. PMLA's strict Section 45 twin conditions yield to Article 21 amid delays, as in Manish Sisodia (2024) , Kalvakuntla Kavitha (2024) , and others mitigating them for speedy trial rights.

Crucially, the court critiqued Section 479(2) as a "repressive" novation risking police-state tactics via endless FIRs, urging a liberty-favoring read in BNSS's "citizen-centric" ethos. Sukesh's 26 other bails and stalled trials tipped the scales—no merits dive needed, just time served.

Echoes from the Bench: Unfiltered Judicial Fire

Under Key Observations :

"Liberty being the most sacrosanct norm in our constitution, the court cannot preach liberty from its decisions while playing footsie with the State upon the bogey of special legislation or economic offences." (Para 39)

"While the offence of money laundering remains grave in nature, a special legislation like PMLA is not a grouse of the State to be exacted upon the liberty of an accused through the court." (Para 40)

"If an interpretation favouring sub section (2) of section 479 BNSS is readily accepted by the courts, the state would be at liberty to arbitrarily keep persons in custody for an indefinite period... simply by registering or invoking other FIRs against the accused." (Para 38)

These remarks, highlighted in media reports, underscore the ruling's bite against using PMLA to indefinitely detain.

Bail with Strings: A Partial Victory

"The application is allowed. Accused Sukesh Chandrashekar @ Sukesh is admitted to bail on furnishing PB & SB in sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- each." Conditions include no witness tampering, address/mobile disclosure, passport surrender, and no foreign travel sans permission.

This sets precedent for PMLA detainees hitting Section 479 thresholds: Multiple cases don't auto-deny; delays demand release. Amid ED's string of losses on bail (Sisodia et al.), it pressures faster trials, balancing anti-money laundering zeal with "bail, not jail" . For Sukesh, entangled in extortion rackets, it's breather—but 30+ cases loom.