Delhi High Court judge, Amit Sharma, recused himself from hearing the National Investigation Agency’s (NIA) appeal for the death penalty of Yasin Malik.
Dehli(Special Correspondent/Webdesk); Judge Recuses Himself from Yasin Malik Case, NIA’s Death Penalty Plea, Malik is a separatist leader who was found guilty of orchestrating violent protests and stone-pelting in 2016. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2022.
The NIA is seeking a harsher sentence, stating that life imprisonment is not enough for crimes that resulted in the loss of life and suffering for the nation and the families of soldiers.
The court has ordered the case to be heard by another bench on August 9. Yasin Malik, who is the leader of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), will be virtually present for the court proceedings from the Tihar jail.
On May 29 last year, the high court had issued a notice to Malik on the NIA’s plea seeking death penalty for him in the terror-funding case and had sought his presence before it on the next date.
Subsequently, jail authorities had filed an application seeking permission for his virtual appearance on the grounds that he was a “very high-risk prisoner” and it was imperative to not physically produce him in court to maintain public order and safety. The request was allowed by the high court.
In the present matter, on May 24, 2022, a trial court in Delhi had sentenced Malik to life imprisonment after holding him guilty for offences under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code.
Malik had pleaded guilty to the charges, including those under the UAPA, and was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Mushaal Mullick Raises Alarm Over Yasin Malik’s Health in Detention
Appealing against the sentence, the NIA has emphasised that a terrorist cannot be sentenced life term only because he has pleaded guilty and chosen not to go through trial.
While seeking enhancement of the sentence to death penalty, the NIA has said if such dreaded terrorists are not given capital punishment on account of pleading guilty, there would be complete erosion of the sentencing policy, and terrorists would have a way out to avoid capital punishment.
A life sentence, the NIA has asserted, is not commensurate with the crime committed by terrorists when the nation and families of soldiers have suffered loss of lives, and that the trial court’s conclusion that Malik’s crimes did not fall within the category of the “rarest of the rare cases” for grant of death penalty is “ex-facie legally flawed and completely unsustainable”.
National Investigation Agency,
Appealing against the sentence, the NIA has emphasised that a terrorist cannot be sentenced life term only because he has pleaded guilty and chosen not to go through trial.
While seeking enhancement of the sentence to death penalty, the NIA has said if such dreaded terrorists are not given capital punishment on account of pleading guilty, there would be complete erosion of the sentencing policy, and terrorists would have a way out to avoid capital punishment.
Yasin Malik’s Life at Risk: SAPM Mushaal Urges UN, Rights Groups to Intervene
A life sentence, the NIA has asserted, is not commensurate with the crime committed by terrorists when the nation and families of soldiers have suffered loss of lives, and that the trial court’s conclusion that Malik’s crimes did not fall within the category of the “rarest of the rare cases” for grant of death penalty is “ex-facie legally flawed and completely unsustainable”.
The trial court, which had rejected the NIA’s plea for death penalty, had said the crimes committed by Malik struck at the “heart of the idea of India” and were intended to forcefully secede Jammu and Kashmir from the Union of India.
It had, however, noted that the case was not the “rarest of rare”, warranting death penalty.
It had, however, noted that the case was not the “rarest of rare”, warranting death penalty.
Follow us on our social media platforms here: Twitter WHATSAPP CHANNEL FACEBOOK PAGE
