Sukesh Moves HC Against Conviction, Calls Trial Court Remarks ‘Pejorative’

Alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar has approached the Delhi High Court challenging a trial court judgment that convicted him of impersonating a Supreme Court judge to influence a special judge in connection with a 2017 corruption case.

In his plea, Chandrasekhar has sought the deletion of what he described as “derogatory, pejorative, stigmatic and unnecessary observations” made about his character in the trial court judgment. He argued that the repeated references to his character were irrelevant to the adjudication of the case.

Chandrasekhar has contended that the judgment was contrary to the fundamental principle that criminal cases must be decided on the basis of evidence rather than assumptions about an accused’s character. He also alleged that the trial court approached the proceedings with a “predetermined and adverse mindset” and denied him an opportunity to complete his defence evidence.

The case relates to a phone call made on April 28, 2017, when Chandrasekhar was in police custody in connection with a corruption case. According to the prosecution, he obtained access to the mobile phone of police constable Manjeet and used it to contact the official landline and mobile phone of Poonam Chaudhary, who was then a special judge handling cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

On August 20, the trial court convicted Chandrasekhar under IPC Sections 170, 189 and 507, relating to impersonation of a public servant, threatening a public servant and criminal intimidation through anonymous communication.

The court held that Chandrasekhar had initially impersonated the private secretary of a then Supreme Court judge and subsequently impersonated the judge himself to interfere with the administration of justice.

Describing the offence as a “direct affront” to judicial independence, the trial court said the alleged conduct was qualitatively different from an ordinary cheating or impersonation case as it sought to use the authority of the country’s highest court to influence another judicial officer.

The High Court will now consider Chandrasekhar’s challenge to the conviction and his request for removal of the remarks from the judgment.