Aam Aadmi Party MLA Naresh Balyan, following his remand to judicial custody, showed his confidence in the judiciary. He stated, “I have full faith in the judiciary.”

Speaking to ANI, his advocate MS Khan said, “There should be continuous criminal activities to invoke a case under MCOCA. As there is no current (fresh) criminal activity in this FIR, legally it cannot be a case under MCOCA. Naresh Balyan filed three complaints against the gangsters in this case.”

Balyan was arrested on December 4. Earlier in the day, Rouse Avenue Court has sent AAP MLA Naresh Balyan to judicial custody. He was there in police custody for seven days in MCOCA case. Following this, he was produced before the court.

Delhi Police sought an additional 10-day custody, stating that the investigation was ongoing and that further custody was necessary to identify other associates of the accused. Special Judge Kaveri Baweja remanded Balyan to judicial custody. Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Akhand Pratap Singh, representing the Delhi Police, sought 10 more days of police custody.

He argued that further custody was required to identify properties acquired by the accused and their previous owners. Singh also mentioned that new facts had emerged during the interrogation and that further custody was needed to identify other members of the organised crime syndicate. The accused is not disclosing the names of his associates. The SPP also argued that custody was needed to investigate how Balyan was sending money abroad to Kapil Sangwan alias Nandu. The accused allegedly received extorted money from the victims, Singh added. During the hearing, the court reviewed Balyan’s medical report from his custody.

The accused was scheduled to be produced in court at 11 AM, but the hearing was deferred as he was first taken to Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital for a medical check-up and later to GB Pant Hospital for a neurological examination. He was subsequently produced via video conferencing from GB Pant Hospital and physically presented after the medical examination. Advocates MS Khan, NC Sharma, Rohit Dalal, and Rahul Kumar appeared for Balyan. Advocate M.S. Khan opposed the extension of police custody, arguing that further custody was unnecessary. He stated that nine associates had already been identified according to a witness.

He also pointed out that approval from a competent officer was required to register an offence under MCOCA. Khan mentioned that 15 FIRs had been registered against Kapil Sangwan alias Nandu, some of which had already been investigated and charge sheets filed. He further argued that Delhi Police was relying on offences committed between May 18, 2021, and July 2023, and that no new offences were involved. “There is no fresh offence. Those offences can’t be reinvestigated under the guise of MCOCA,” Khan argued. He further asserted that continuous criminal activity was needed to invoke MCOCA, and no such fresh act had occurred, making further remand unjustified. In rebuttal, SPP Singh stated that some tests had been advised for the accused and would be conducted. He confirmed that Balyan’s health was fine.

The court then asked Balyan if he wanted to say anything about his health. Balyan responded that the advised tests should be conducted. SPP Singh argued that the three judgments cited by the defense counsel were not relevant to this case. Khan had referred to these judgments to assert that a continuous offence must be shown for MCOCA to apply. SPP Singh further argued that people were often too scared to report cases due to fear of the syndicates, and that the syndicates had become a serious menace to society.

He highlighted that the modus operandi in various cases was similar. Advocate NC Sharma, representing Balyan, argued by stating that the interrogation had not been completed yet. The advocate questioned how it would get finished in the coming week if it hadn’t been done till now.

Also Read: YEIDA Residential Plot Scheme 2024: Check Draw Date For 821 Premium Plots Near Yamuna Expressway