Sukesh Chandrasekhar Convicted For Impersonating SC Judge; Sentence Due Thursday
Sukesh Chandrasekhar convicted for posing as Supreme Court judge.
A Delhi court has convicted alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar for impersonating a sitting Supreme Court judge in an attempt to influence a special judge to grant him bail in a corruption case in 2017. Chief Judicial Magistrate Harshita Mishra found him guilty under IPC Sections 170, 189 and 507 for personating a public servant, threatening a public servant and criminal intimidation through anonymous communication.
The case relates to a phone call made on April 28, 2017, when Chandrasekhar was in police custody in connection with the 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.
The court found that Chandrasekhar initially posed as the private secretary of a sitting Supreme Court judge before impersonating the judge himself. He allegedly attempted to persuade Chaudhary to grant him bail at the earliest and threatened her with adverse professional consequences if she failed to comply. The court held that the impersonation was central to the alleged attempt to influence the judicial process.
Also Read: Citizens Have Right To Know: SC Judge Calls For Transparency In Judicial Appointments
In its order, the court observed that the case went beyond ordinary cheating or impersonation because it involved an attempt to undermine judicial independence by invoking the authority of the country's highest court. The judge held that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that Chandrasekhar deliberately assumed the identity of a Supreme Court judge to interfere with the administration of justice.
The court also held that the ingredients of IPC Section 189 were established, noting that the communication sought to influence a judicial officer's discretion by invoking the supposed authority of a superior court. It further found Section 507 applicable because the alleged criminal intimidation was communicated anonymously. The court stressed that judicial decisions must be based on law and evidence rather than purported instructions delivered through telephone calls.
The court will hear arguments on the quantum of sentence on August 27. It has also directed Delhi Police to re-examine the role of constable Manjeet, including how Chandrasekhar gained access to his mobile phone, whether the device was locked, who knew its password and why its alleged use was not promptly reported.
Also Read: #JUSTIN: High Alert In Samba After Satellite Phone Signal Detected In J&K
