New Delhi: A Delhi court dismissed an anticipatory bail plea of an accused in a 2019 case registered under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), observing that he was allegedly a member of an “organised crime syndicate involved in multiple offences”.Judge Sonu Agnihotri said that the syndicate was linked to seven criminal cases, and courts had taken cognisance of four cases in the last decade, thereby satisfying the statutory requirement of “continuing unlawful activity” under the law.The court noted that Riyazuddin’s name was included in the proposal under MCOCA and approved by the additional commissioner of police (crime). It held that the stringent bail conditions under the Act were not met.The defence argued that the dispute stemmed from a Feb 1, 2022, incident when the accused, a driver, was stopped by a PCR vehicle while driving his RTV bus after a minor collision with an auto. The counsel alleged that inspector Yogender threatened to arrest him and impound the vehicle, and demanded a bribe for its release. The defence claimed the accused later paid protection money to avoid challans and possessed a video recording of the transaction, arguing the case was filed to target him for exposing alleged police corruption.The defence further claimed that the accused was “falsely implicated after raising complaints against police officials”. The counsel said he wrote to the LG in 2022 against inspector Yogender and constable Shokendra, and later filed another complaint against SI Sahansar Pal in 2025, and approached Delhi High Court seeking registration of an FIR against them.Opposing the plea, the prosecution, led by Pravin Rahul, argued that anticipatory bail is not provided under MCOCA, and the accused was part of an organised crime syndicate allegedly led by Raj Kumar alias Raju Meena, who has been arrested. .The prosecution argued the complaints against police officers were an “afterthought”, noting that they were filed only after a separate FIR was registered against him. The prosecution also cited statements of protected witnesses and confessional statements of the co-accused alleging that he used associates to secretly record videos of police personnel for extortion and blackmail.Agreeing with the prosecution, the court observed that there was “no reason to disbelieve the allegations against the accused”, and dismissed the anticipatory bail plea.
