A Delhi court on Thursday evening sent Aam Aadmi Party MLA Naresh Balyan to one-day judicial custody in connection with a case filed under the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA).
The MLA, who was in police custody in the extortion case, was arrested on charges under Makoka on Wednesday. The same evening, he was released on bail in the extortion case.
On Thursday, when the Delhi Police requested the court to remand him for 10 days, special judge Kaveri Baweja of the Rouse Avenue court said she needed time to go through the laws related to the case in question and sent him to judicial custody for a day.
This was the third court Balayan had visited in a few hours. He was produced before Additional Sessions Judge Vandana Jain of Dwarka court in the morning. Here too 10 days police custody has been demanded. Although this application was ASJ Jain dismissed it for “lack of jurisdiction”..
The Delhi Police had also demanded that Balyan’s case be transferred to a special court that deals with cases against MPs and MLAs. The Dwarka court judge was to decide whether the case should be heard by the MP/Legislative Court or by a designated court. MCOCA matters.
“I have no authority to hand over the case,” said ASJ Jain. “Show me an example where this has been done. What was the need to come here? It’s a sheer waste of my time… Show me a justice,” he said while submitting an application for Balayan’s custody before an “appropriate court” (an MP/legislature court). said giving freedom to the Investigating Officer (IO) to do so.
Following this, the Delhi Police took Balian to the Rouse Avenue court – where cases against MLAs are heard.
Balyan was then produced before Principal District and Sessions Joint Special Judge Anju Bajaj Chandana at Rouse Avenue, who transferred his case to Special Judge Baweza’s court.
Finally Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Akhand Pratap Singh spoke in the court of Special Judge Baweza. ‘Balyan is a facilitator. He identified potential targets for extortion. He used to invest money for that (Gunda Kapil) SangwanIt is a syndicate,’ he submitted to the court.
“We need to confront him with evidence and identify the assets he invested for the syndicate,” he added.
On the other hand, advocate NC Sharma, representing Balyan, argued that there is only one case against the MLA and the provisions of the Code do not apply to him. It should be proved that he (Balyan) is a member of the syndicate. He says that there is only one case against him, and no one has been named in it.
Sharma also argued that multiple charge sheets should be filed against Balyan in the Mako case.
The SPP replied: “Many chargesheets are not required under MCOCA for those aiding and abetting syndicate leaders.”
Sharma denied: “So far no one has come on record as the accused. His name was never mentioned in any FIR.
“There is no need to have criminal antecedents,” came the SPP’s response.
The extortion case against Balayan stems from a police complaint filed by Gurcharan, a resident of West Delhi’s Mohan Garden, alleging that in July 2023, he received a ransom call demanding Rs 1 crore from gangster Sangwan. Balayan’s name came to light last year after a Hindi news channel aired a recording of an alleged phone call between Balyan and Sangwan.
MCOCA was imposed this year in a separate extortion case against Sangwan, allegedly operated from the UK. According to police officials, Balyan’s name has come up in the case as an alleged accomplice in settling the extortion demand made by Sangwan from the businessman. They have also claimed that there are statements of two witnesses against Balyan.