In jail since 2024: Delhi High Court pulls up Police for delay in MCOCA probe against AAP MLA Naresh Balyan

The Delhi High Court on Friday censured Delhi Police for its failure to complete the probe against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Naresh Balyan in a case registered under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) [Naresh Balyan v. State NCT of Delhi].

Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma said the investigation should have been expedited as Balyan has been in prison since 2024.

"If you keep on investigating this case, when are they going to hear charges? A bail court will obviously say let the charges be framed first," the Court remarked.

During the hearing, the Court also noted that two witnesses had retracted their statements against Balyan.

Balyan was arrested on December 4, 2024 on allegations that he was linked to a criminal syndicate headed by gangster Kapil Sangwan.

On January 15, 2025, trial judge Kaveri Baweja rejected Balyan's bail plea, observing that there was sufficient evidence to indicate a link between the AAP leader and the organised crime syndicate headed by Sangwan.

The Rouse Avenue Court judge further held that Balyan did not satisfy the stringent requirements for bail under the MCOCA. Balyan had earlier secured bail in an extortion case on December 4, 2025, only to be arrested hours later in the MCOCA case.

During the hearing of his bail plea today, Bayan's counsel, Senior Advocate Rebecca M John, submitted that it was not clear whether it was any gangster's voice in the audio cited against him.

"They took my voice samples. They have not taken voice samples of anybody else. We don't know if it is gangster, they are claiming that it is a gangster. Who is this other person?," John asled.

The Court asked whether charges had been framed against him. In response, it was submitted that further investigation was still going on.

The Court then questioned the delay.

"Whether he has done it or not done it, it is a matter of trial. But otherwise even for charge, at least you should expedite. Since 2024, he has been in jail. Now it is 2026," the judge remarked.

The Court further said the police cannot probe at such speed while the accused remains in prison.

"For two years you cannot sit when somebody is in jail. Whose voice samples have you taken? Then later on you will say you have to take voice samples," it observed.

"Aap kyu delay kar rahe hain? [Why are you delaying?] At least let it come up for charge. Let us see whether the charge is made out. Why are you delaying it?," the Court added.

The Court then asked the police to give a deadline for completing the probe. Special Counsel Amit Prasad submitted that he will get back with instructions to answer the Court's query.

"Let me sit with them and finalize a structure and come back with a schedule in how much time what all we will be able to conclude," Prasad said.

The Court, however, said that the supplementary chargesheet should be filed by March 30.

At this stage, Balyan's counsel submitted that the bail plea should be decided regardless.

"My instructions are, let the bail application be decided regardless," she said.

The Court was not impressed with the line of argument.

"I was trying to help you, if you don't want it then alright. We will hear you then on the next date. Then there will be no order to expedite. Don't expedite it then. Then do whatever. I will not pass on order," Justice Sharma said.

John submitted that her arguments are in line with the client's instructions. At this, the Court said,

"I understand."

The Court then adjourned the matter and asked the State to submit a status report before the next date of hearing on March 30.

"The matter was put up for the first time before this Court today. Arguments heard and concluded on behalf of petitioner. Prosecution will be heard on the next date. In the meantime please file your status report. Then you can file your supplementary also," the judge said.