The Supreme Court on Monday refused to interfere with a Delhi High Court order declining to stay the conviction and sentence of alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar, who was found guilty of impersonating a Supreme Court judge and attempting to influence a judicial officer to secure bail in a corruption case.
A Bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manmohan dismissed Chandrashekhar’s plea challenging the High Court’s refusal to suspend his conviction and sentence pending the outcome of his criminal appeal.
The proceedings arose from Chandrashekhar’s conviction by a Delhi trial court under Sections 170 (personating a public servant), 189 (threat of injury to a public servant) and 507 (criminal intimidation by anonymous communication) of the Indian Penal Code.
Appearing for Chandrashekhar, Senior Advocate Shoeb Alam argued that the trial court had made adverse observations about his character while referring to 31 criminal cases pending against him, despite acknowledging that he had not been convicted in those matters.
The counsel contended that such observations could prejudice the accused in the other criminal proceedings. Referring to the provisions of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, he submitted that the remarks could operate against Chandrashekhar as evidence of bad character in the pending trials.
During the hearing, Justice Pardiwala questioned the basis on which Chandrashekhar was seeking suspension of his conviction.
The Bench, however, found no ground to interfere with the High Court’s decision and held that the impugned order disclosed no error of law warranting interference by the Supreme Court.
“Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having gone through the materials on record, there is no error, not to speak of any error of law, committed by the High Court by passing the impugned order,” the Bench observed.
It further clarified that all other criminal trials against Chandrashekhar must continue independently and be decided on their respective merits in accordance with law.
The case relates to an incident dating back to April 28, 2017, when Chandrashekhar was lodged in police custody in connection with a corruption case. According to the prosecution, he allegedly gained access to a mobile phone belonging to a police constable entrusted with his custody and used it to contact the judicial officer hearing the corruption case.
The prosecution alleged that Chandrashekhar initially posed as the private secretary of a sitting Supreme Court judge and subsequently impersonated the judge himself. Through the calls, he allegedly attempted to exert pressure on the judicial officer to grant him bail.
The judicial officer concerned was Poonam Chaudhary, who was then presiding over cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
On August 20, 2026, the Chief Judicial Magistrate convicted Chandrashekhar after finding that the prosecution had established the charges against him. On August 29, he was sentenced to a total of eight years’ imprisonment, with the substantive sentences directed to run consecutively.
The trial court awarded him two years of rigorous imprisonment each under Sections 170 and 189 IPC and four years under Section 507 IPC.
While imposing the sentence, the trial court had characterised the conduct as an attack on the judicial institution, observing that impersonating a Supreme Court judge to interfere with judicial proceedings was qualitatively different from ordinary impersonation offences.
The post Supreme Court refuses to stay Sukesh Chandrashekhar’s conviction for impersonating Supreme Court judge to secure bail appeared first on India Legal.