The Delhi High Court Today (Jan 29) denied AAP MLA Naresh Balyan’s request for custody parole, which he sought to help in his wife’s election campaign. Arrested for alleged links to gangster Kapil Sangwan’s crime syndicate, Balyan failed to meet the strict bail conditions under MCOCA. Despite his lawyer citing a Supreme Court ruling on Tahir Hussain, the court ruled his case was different and refused relief.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad, representing the State, told the Delhi High Court on Monday that
“indirect or direct involvement with organized crime syndicate is punishable under the law.”
He explained that a person does not need to commit a crime directly to be held responsible. Even having a connection to the crime is enough to make someone liable under the law.
SPP further argued that-
“Not necessary that the accused person must have been involved in foundational crime to be held liable under MCOCA.”
This means that a person can be charged under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) even if they were not part of the original crime.
These arguments were presented before Justice Vikas Mahajan in a bail plea filed by Naresh Balyan, an MLA from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). Balyan had requested bail because his wife was contesting the upcoming Delhi Elections, and she needed his support.
However, the police strongly opposed the bail plea, stating that the investigation was still in progress and some witnesses had recently provided important statements.
SPP Prasad also emphasized that it is not mandatory for an FIR to include the names of all individuals involved in the crime. He explained that although official approval is required for the court to take action, Section 21(4) of the relevant Act strictly states that bail cannot be granted unless the public prosecutor has had the opportunity to oppose it or the court is fully convinced that there is no strong evidence against the accused.
Regarding Balyan’s case, SPP Prasad referred to the charge order, arguing that it clearly showed the existence of a crime syndicate. He mentioned the status report, which, according to him, described the key incidents that led to the case.
The prosecution highlighted that Suraj Bhan, an eyewitness to the alleged execution of a doctor by the syndicate, had become an important part of the investigation.
PREVIOUSLY IN DELHI HC
The Delhi High Court on Jan 29 refused the request of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Naresh Balyan for custody parole in a case under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).
Balyan wanted this relief so that he could help in the election campaign of his wife, who is standing for the upcoming Delhi assembly elections.
Justice Vikas Mahajan did not allow Balyan’s request but mentioned that he would hear the MLA’s regular bail plea the next day.
ALSO READ: AAP MLA Balyan’s Bail Plea || Delhi High Court Seeks State Response
Earlier this month, a trial court in Delhi had already rejected Balyan’s bail plea, which made the AAP leader approach the High Court for help.
Balyan was arrested on December 4, 2024, because of allegations that he was connected to a criminal group led by gangster Kapil Sangwan.
On January 15, Judge Kaveri Baweja dismissed Balyan’s bail plea, saying that there was enough proof to show a connection between the AAP leader and the organized crime syndicate run by Sangwan.
The judge from Rouse Avenue Court also pointed out that MCOCA has strict rules for bail and found that Balyan did not meet the necessary conditions to be granted bail. She stated that there was no reason to believe that Balyan was innocent or that he would not commit a similar crime if released on bail.
ALSO READ: Court Sends AAP MLA Balyan to Judicial Custody: ‘No Further Police Remand Granted’
She also agreed with the argument made by the State that if Balyan was granted bail, he might influence witnesses and disturb the trial.
Before this, Balyan had received bail in an extortion case on December 4, but just a few hours later, he was arrested again in the MCOCA case.
Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa, who represented Balyan, argued that his client should be given the same treatment as former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain. Hussain, who is an accused in the Delhi riots case, was recently allowed custody parole by the Supreme Court to campaign for elections.
“I cannot communicate with my wife. There is no phone to talk to my wife. No means of communication. Jail is not providing any facility. My wife has no experience in campaigning. Please allow only 3 hours. Nobody can substitute the place of the husband,”
-Pahwa said.
ALSO READ: MCOCA | Delhi Court Denies Bail to AAP MLA Balyan in Extortion Case
Pahwa also assured the court that Balyan would not influence any witnesses since he had no knowledge about them.
“I don’t know anything about the protected witnesses, where they live,”
-it was argued.
Delhi Police opposed the plea, stating that the investigation was still ongoing.
In the end, the Court denied Balyan’s request for custody parole, stating that his case was different from that of Tahir Hussain.
CASE TITLE:
Naresh Balyan v. State NCT of Delhi.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Naresh Balyan
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
