New Delhi [India], January 15 (ANI): The Rouse Avenue Court on Wednesday dismissed the bail application of AAP MLA Naresh Balyan in the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) case.
Balyan is in judicial custody after his arrest on December 4 in the MCOCA case linked to Gangster Kapila Sangwan alias Nandu.
Special judge Kaveri Baweja dismissed the bail application.
The Rouse Avenue court has issued notice to Delhi police on a plea moved for AAP MLA Naresh Balyan. He has sought permission to sign documents to open a bank account and other documents required to contest Delhi Assembly elections.
The Rouse Avenue court has issued notice to Delhi police on a plea moved for AAP MLA Naresh Balyan. He has sought permission to sign documents to open a bank account and other documents required to contest Delhi Assembly elections.
In a strategic move, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has nominated Pooja Baliyan, wife of current MLA Naresh Baliyan, as their candidate for the Uttam Nagar Assembly seat. Notably, Naresh Baliyan will file nomination as a proxy candidate.
The court on January 9 reserved an order on the bail plea. Special Judge Kaveri Baweja after hearing the arguments by the counsel for the accused and Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) for Delhi police had reserved the order.
SPP Akhand Pratap Singh filed judgment on the point of fulfilment of ingredients for invoking MCOCA.
Delhi police on January 8 had opposed the bail of AAP MLA Naresh Balyan and said that in his disclosure statement has disclosed his nexus and association with Kapil Sangwan alias Nandu.
Based on the confessional statement of co-accused Ritik alias Peter and Sachin Chikara, Delhi police in its reply have also said that Naresh Balyan is the facilitator and conspirator in the organised crime syndicate of Nandu. He also provided money to one of the members of the syndicate.
Delhi Police had filed a reply and stated that the co-accused had confessed that accused Naresh Balyan was facilitator/ conspirator in the organized crime syndicate of Kapil Sangwan alias Nandu and he had provided money to one of the members of the syndicate after the commission of the crime for expenses during evading his arrest.
Delhi Police had stated that during the investigation the statements under section 180 BNSS of public witnesses, have been recorded in this case in which they have stated about the active involvement of accused Naresh Balyan with the organized crime syndicate of Kapil Sangwan alias Nandu for pecuniary gain.
It was further stated that the accused Naresh Balyan was arrested on December 4, 2024, and during the investigation disclosure statement of Naresh Balyan was recorded in which he disclosed his nexus and association with Kapil Sangwan alias Nandu.
In its reply, Delhi police had stated that during the investigation as per the statements of witnesses and the disclosure statement of the accused names of nine suspected persons came to notice out of which four have been identified but they are not traceable, who are associated with accused Naresh Balyan in the commission of organized crime of extortion, land grabbing from the businessmen, builders, property dealers.
It is also stated in the reply that the other suspected persons whose names have come on record are to be identified to unearth the entire commission of organized crime and to find the trail of pecuniary gain obtained by the accused Naresh Balyan and the syndicate members.
During the investigation, it was revealed that the accused and his absconding associates were involved in the commission of organized crime. To extort money from the businessmen and to make the bonafide properties of witnesses as disputed properties to grab, police have stated.
Advocate M S Khan, Rohit Dalal and Rahul Sahani appeared for Naresh Balyan. It was argued that There is no new offence in the FIR. Organised crime is different from other offences under IPC.
Advocate M S Khan argued that FIR under MCOCA is not against organised crime, it is against the organised crime syndicate led by Kapil Sangwan alias Nandu.
It was further argued that there have to be continuing unlawful activities, organised crime and organised crime syndicates.
Defence counsel submitted that Police are relying on a video clip. Which they claim got in August 2024 after registration of this FIR. Police misled the court. They suppressed the material facts, he argued.
He submitted that this clip has been there since August 2023. The same IO got this clip in August 2023. The accused was granted bail in the connected case by the ACJM on December 4. They have suppressed the material facts.
There has to be some new occurrence/act within 10 years before the registration of FIR.
Defence counsel concluded hai argument by submitting that the presumption of innocence is a human right. The veracity of the confessional statement is to be tested at the time of trial, not the time of granting of bail. Nothing against me (Naresh), no organised crime.
On the other hand, Special public prosecutor (SPP) Akhand Pratap Singh opposed the bail application.
He submitted that there is a new occurrence/act. Three FIRs are there. This fulfills the ingredients of continuing criminal activities.
There is no need for a fresh incident. The third offence was committed like organised crime, SPP argued.
There are statements, of witnesses and co-accused, there is other evidence, clip is not the only evidence. The confessional statement can be attributed to co-accused, he added.
SPP Singh submitted that the role of the accused was the identification of a possible target. He is involved in land grabbing. He used to buy land at a lower price and sell the same at higher prices. (ANI)
Disclaimer: This story is auto-generated from a syndicated feed of ANI; only the image & headline may have been reworked by News Services Division of World News Network Inc Ltd and Palghar News and Pune News and World News
HINDI, MARATHI, GUJARATI, TAMIL, TELUGU, BENGALI, KANNADA, ORIYA, PUNJABI, URDU, MALAYALAM
For more details and packages
