New Delhi: Kashmiri separatist leader Yasin Malik has not only failed to reform himself, but has also become “several steps in the hierarchy” more dangerous given his influence on the “young minds of the country”.
This is how the National Investigation Agency (NIA) described the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) leader in an appeal filed in the Delhi High Court seeking the death penalty for Malik, who is currently serving life in prison after conviction. is serving his sentence. on charges of terrorism.
The agency, in its petition, had questioned the sentence awarded to Malik by a trial court in Delhi last year.
The NIA submitted to the High Court that showing Malik’s “softness” would not only be a “mockery” of the “Indian judicial system” but would also be a gross injustice to the families of the victims and the security forces who were either killed or seriously injured. Went. (Kashmir) Planned and executed at the behest of Malik during conflicts in the valley.
The NIA further cited two specific crimes to argue that Malik should be given the death penalty – the killing of four armed forces personnel in Jammu and Kashmir, and the 1989 kidnapping of Rubaiya Sayeed, the daughter of the then Union Home Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed. ,
The NIA argued in its appeal that these two actions were carried out to pressure the Indian government to accede to Malik’s demands – which amounted to waging war against the country.
The NIA said a collective examination of Malik’s email messages, communications, documents and videos of his speeches proved that he had “failed to reform”.
The agency has appealed that the death sentence be carried out despite Malik being convicted of all the offenses of which he was charged.
A bench headed by Justice Siddharth Mridul on Monday issued notice to Malik on NIA’s appeal and also issued a warrant to appear before the court on August 9.
case against Malik
Malik was Arrested in May 2019 in connection with a 2017 terror-funding case. The NIA had registered the case in June 2016 following incidents of stone-pelting in the Valley.
According to the NIA appeal, 89 incidents of violent stone-pelting and other illegal protests such as burning of schools and damage to public property were reported in 10 days in June 2016. In the investigation, 366 people were arrested in connection with these incidents.
In May last year, Malik had told Special Judge Praveen Singh that he was ready to plead guilty as he did not want to face any criminal trial. This was done after charges were framed against him and others under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the anti-terror law, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
Noting that he was not aware of the maximum sentence that could be given to him, and did not have a lawyer to explain to him the consequences of pleading guilty, the court appointed a lawyer to assist Malik on this issue. Did.
Finally, on May 25, 2022, the court sentenced Malik to life imprisonment, while believing that his case did not fall into the “rarest of the rare” category – a criterion used by the judiciary to determine whether or not the death penalty should be imposed.
Malik was sentenced to life imprisonment on two counts – Section 121 of the Indian Penal Code (waging war against the Government of India) and Section 17 of the UAPA (raising funds for a terrorist act).
The court sentenced Malik to 10 years in prison under each of the following: IPC sections 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 121-A (conspiracy to wage war against the Government of India), and sections 15 (terrorism), 18 ( conspiracy to commit terrorism) and 20 of the UAPA (being a member of a terrorist organisation).
It sentenced them to five years in jail each under sections 13 (unlawful act), 38 (offence relating to membership of terrorism) and 39 (support to terrorism) of the UAPA.
All the sentences are to run concurrently.
As per the judgments of the Supreme Court, life imprisonment means imprisonment till the last breath, unless the appropriate authority grants remission to the convict. On completion of 14 years in prison an application for remission can be made by the convict.
NIA’s Argument
During the trial court hearing, Malik spoke about how he was issued a passport during the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government (1999-2004) at the Center and how he was allowed to travel and speak around the world.
This, he said, showed that he was not a criminal.
He also said that as a follower of the “principles of Mahatma Gandhi”, ever since he “gave up arms in 1994”, he had only been practicing peaceful politics in Kashmir.
The over 600-page NIA appeal said Malik’s claim was “absolutely false”.
Instead, Malik said, he was using the court proceedings “as a means to reach out to the public to gain sympathy and further his illegal and immoral agenda of waging war and secession of Jammu and Kashmir from the Union of India”. Had been”.
Arguing on technical grounds as well, the NIA said that Malik’s admission of guilt amounts to admission of all the facts, and it was an admission of having committed the offenses alleged in the court.
Quoting from Black’s Law Dictionary, the NIA states that “admit guilt” has “the same effect as a guilty verdict and sentence after a trial on the merits”.
“There was no plea bargaining or inducement, but the accused had knowingly understood the nature of the allegations leveled against him, the consequences of acceptance of the same, and then accepted them fully without any remorse or regret,” said Gaya NIA appeal
Speaking to ThePrint, senior Supreme Court advocate Ajit Kumar Sinha agreed with the NIA’s arguments in the high court.
He explained that pleading guilty amounts to admission. “There can be no leniency towards the guilty. The punishment should be commensurate with the offense reflected in the Indian Penal Code and the punishment prescribed in law,” Sinha said.
He said that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to condone it.
Sinha said, “If the statute allows flexibility and specifies minimum and maximum punishment, then in such a scenario the judge can use his discretion to award lesser jail term to the convict.”
The NIA has filed its appeal a year after the trial court pronounced its verdict against Malik – beyond the 90-day period stipulated in the NIA Act – requesting the court to condone the delay.
According to the agency, it had filed an appeal in June 2022 but had withdrawn it for refilling due to objections from the High Court Registry.
The NIA said, however, that the refilling could not take place within the stipulated time period due to “certain contingencies”, adding that the officers working on the case were involved in various investigations, and hence could not pursue the matter at the administrative level and at the legal level. Could not consult. team in time.
(Editing by Nida Fatima Siddiqui)
Read also: ‘Ready To Face Whatever Lies Next’: What Yasin Malik Said About Guilty Plea In Terror-Funding Case