Mere eyewash: Court tears into Delhi Police over organised crime case

A Delhi court rebuked the police for failing to arrest MCOCA accused for years despite repeated offences. The judge said the delay defeated the law's purpose and warranted an enquiry into erring officials.A court has slammed Delhi Police over six-year delay in arrests.New Delhi,Oct 7, 2026 11:18 ISTA court has sharply criticised Delhi Police for the handling of an organised crime case, saying two accused allegedly continued to commit serious offences, including murder, for years after the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) was invoked against them, but were arrested only in 2026.Special Judge Gaurav Rao said the police report placed before the court was an "absolutely perfunctory and mere eyewash".The court has sent a copy of its October 5 order to the Delhi police commissioner, saying the matter "calls for a detailed inquiry and appropriate action against all the erring officials/investigating officers." It has also sought a report from the commissioner's office by the next hearing and directed the concerned joint commissioner of police to remain present in person with the report and his comments.The case relates to an FIR registered in September 2020, in which MCOCA was invoked against Mukesh alias Punit and Pardeep alias Guri. The court noted that when MCOCA was invoked, Mukesh was already involved in around 20 FIRs, including two for murder and one for attempt to murder.After that, he was allegedly named in eight more FIRs between 2021 and 2024, including cases of murder, attempt to murder, robbery and kidnapping. He was arrested only on February 9, 2026, by Assistant Commissioner of Police Rakesh Kumar after the investigation was assigned to him on September 25, 2025. "Hence, before ACP Rakesh Kumar, none of the IOs made any efforts to arrest the said accused," the court said.The court said Pardeep alias Guri was also involved in several cases and, according to the chargesheet, committed a number of heinous offences in 2020 after MCOCA was invoked against him. He was also named in two FIRs registered in 2024, yet was arrested only on April 16, 2026.The court further noted that three other accused — Vinod alias Sonu alias Praveen alias Khalifa, Pardeep alias Anil alias Salamuddin and Vikas alias Vicky alias Pankaj — have still not been arrested, and investigation against them remains incomplete despite more than six years having passed.The judge said that at the previous hearing, the court had asked whether Mukesh was on bail or in judicial custody when MCOCA was invoked against him and till the time of his arrest. It had also sought details of the other cases and explanations from the investigating officers.However, the judge said the report filed by the deputy commissioner of police, Outer North district, was "absolutely silent" on these points. "The report of the DCP, Outer North district, is absolutely perfunctory and a mere eyewash. The report failed to address the query raised by this court and though lapses as well as the considerable delay is writ large from the record, the additional DCP said that 'police officials have made best efforts in the present case and are still making their best efforts'," the judge said.Taking strong exception to that stand, the court said, "if, according to the additional DCP, this is the best effort, then this court has nothing more to say". The judge said the officer was perhaps "insensitive to the legislative intent behind the MCOCA", which was enacted to curb organised crime. The court said that if accused persons are allowed to remain free and commit serious offences despite the invocation of such a stringent law, it defeats the purpose of the legislation. "But for the fact that the accused persons were not arrested, the crimes could not have been committed by them, especially after the MCOCA was invoked against them," the court said.The court added that failure to arrest a person accused of several heinous offences emboldens him to commit further crimes and "sends an extremely wrong message to the society". It also noted that the DCP's report referred to a Delhi Police headquarters circular dated July 11, 2024, on expeditious investigation and timely arrests. Despite that, the accused remained at large for six years, getting more time and opportunity to commit more crimes. The court said the additional DCP appeared to feel he was not answerable to the court or the public, "who has all this while borne the brunt of the criminal activities of the crime syndicate", and called such a "lackadaisical approach" unacceptable.Underlining that long delays in investigation and filing chargesheets can harm a trial because crucial evidence may be lost and witnesses' memories may fade, the court said it appeared that the matter had not been brought to the notice of the police commissioner. The matter has now been listed for further proceedings on October 13, with the court expecting the investigation to be concluded at the earliest.- Ends