The Delhi Police has opposed the bail plea of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Naresh Balyan, arguing that his confessional statement reveals a connection to a notorious gangster, Kapil Sangwan alias Nandu.
The police claim that Balyan’s role in the criminal activities of Nandu’s organised crime syndicate goes beyond mere association. They allege that Balyan acted as a facilitator and conspirator in the syndicate's operations, even providing financial support to one of the members involved in criminal activities.
Balyan was arrested in December 2024 and is currently in judicial custody. The case, under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), has attracted significant attention, with the Delhi Police citing confessions from co-accused individuals as key evidence.
According to the police, the co-accused have revealed Balyan’s involvement in facilitating organised crime, specifically in land grabbing and extortion from business owners, builders, and property dealers.
In a detailed reply filed by the Delhi Police, it was noted that public witnesses had testified to Balyan’s active role in the syndicate, stating that he was involved in efforts to extort money from businessmen.
Additionally, the police mentioned that Balyan's arrest and subsequent confession have led to the identification of several other suspected members of the gang. However, while some of these individuals have been named, they remain untraceable.
The defence counsel, led by Advocate M S Khan, contested the Delhi Police's allegations, arguing that the FIR does not specifically mention organised crime but rather points to the syndicate led by Kapil Sangwan.
The defence further contested the validity of the evidence presented by the prosecution, especially a video clip, which the police claimed to have obtained in August 2024.
Defence lawyers argue that this video was actually in possession of the investigating officer since August 2023 and should have been presented earlier.
They also argued that no new criminal acts had occurred in the period leading up to the filing of the FIR, thereby questioning the application of the MCOCA in this case.
The defence team also emphasised the presumption of innocence, which they claimed is a fundamental human right. They argued that the veracity of the confessional statements made by the co-accused should be tested during the trial and not at the time of the bail application.
The lawyers also pointed out that the evidence presented by the prosecution, such as the video clip, should not be the sole basis for denying bail.
On the other hand, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Akhand Pratap Singh vehemently opposed the bail application. He argued that the offence involved in this case qualifies as organised crime, with ongoing illegal activities and clear evidence of the syndicate's criminal operations.
The SPP pointed to witness testimonies, the confessions of co-accused individuals, and other evidence to bolster the case against Balyan.
He asserted that the continued criminal activities and Balyan’s role in the syndicate’s operations, including his involvement in land grabbing and extorting money, fulfilled the criteria for organised crime under MCOCA.
Follow us
