New Delhi

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to 4 accused in the Rs 200 crore Extortion case under MCOCA. This case is linked to Sukesh Chandrasekhar. This case was registered by the Delhi Police Special Cell in 2021.

Justice Prateek Jalan granted bail to Arun Muthu, Kamlesh Kothari, B Mohanraj and Sudhir. They have been granted bail on a bail bond of Rs. 2.5 Lakh and two surety bonds.

Justice Prateek Jalan said that the factors, including the number of accused (24), the number of witnesses (403), and the complexity of the case, make an expeditious conclusion of the proceedings unlikely. Having regard to the role ascribed to the petitioner by the prosecution, I am of the view that his further incarceration as an undertrial is inappropriate.

While granting bail to Arun Muthu, the high court highlighted, "This case raises a question of the interplay between the constitutional rights of an undertrial, who remains in custody for a prolonged period, with the statutory restrictions on grant of bail, found in several special statutes such as the UAPA, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, MCOCA, and PMLA."

Justice Jalan said, "I have had the opportunity to consider the legal position governing this question, both in Leena Paulose and Deepak Ramnani."

The high court noted that the petitioner is not accused of participation in the alleged acts of extortion against the complainant or any other person. His role, as per the prosecution, was in planning and management of the funds which were sent by Sukesh to Leena, including facilitating accounting entries, purchase of properties and luxury cars, arranging parking of the said cars, and production of a film.

It is alleged that he was remunerated for these tasks by way of commission. He is accused of frequent meetings with Leena as well as with Sukesh when he was on parole.

The statements of other co-accused, and of witnesses relied upon by the prosecution, do not prima facie accord any higher role to the petitioner than this, the High Court said.

The High Court also noted that Arun Muthu has already spent approximately 4 years and 10 months in custody as an undertrial. The offence under Section 3(4) of MCOCA carries a sentence which may extend to imprisonment of five years to life imprisonment.

"Although I have held, in Leena Paulose's order, that the delay in the present case cannot be attributed to prosecutorial delays or court inaction alone, I am nonetheless of the view that the facts of each case have to be examined on their own merits, with due consideration of the specific roles ascribed to the individual in question," Justice Prateek Jalan.

Senior Advocate Anand Grover and Ravinder Singh alongwith Raveesha Gupta, appeared for Mohan Raj's lawyer.

Advocate Navin Malhotra, along with Ritwik Malhotra, appeared for Arun Muthu and argued on the point of prolonged custody of the accused as an undertrial.

It was argued that Muthu was arrested on 05.09.2021 and has thus remained in custody for a period of almost 4 years and 10 months. Charges have recently been framed by an order of the Special Court on 03.06.2026.

It was also argued that the State has cited 403 witnesses, and the chargesheets collectively exceed 10,000 pages. Further, one of the co-accused, Navas KI, has been arrested recently, and it is likely that a supplementary charge sheet will have to be filed in relation to his case.

It was further submitted that the petitioner's right to a speedy trial, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, has been defeated, and his continued custody pending trial is constitutionally unjustifiable.

While opposing the bail plea, senior advocate Sanjay Jain and Advocate Akhand Pratap Singh submitted that the petitioner had a direct role in handling the extorted funds in Chennai, along with other accused persons, with full knowledge of the illegal activities of the Organised Crime Syndicate.

He was thus not only involved in abetment of the activities of the OCS, but was also directly involved in the "continuing unlawful activities", within the meaning of Section.

READ MORE: Sajida Khan: India's first woman audio engineer

2(1)(d) of MCOCA, which reveals "membership" of the crime syndicate under Section 3(4) of MCOCA. He submitted that the petitioner and B Mohanraj, along with other Chennai-based co-accused, participated in planning and execution of the activities related to handling of the extorted funds sent by Sukesh to Leena.