New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday called for a report from the jail authorities on the non-appearance of separatist leader Yasin Malik from prison in a terror funding case.
A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Arun Bhardwaj noted that Malik was to be produced before the court virtually.
“Respondent (Malik) had to be produced virtually before us. However, it is not done. Let a report in this regard be called from the jail superintendent concerned,” the bench said.
The Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front chief (JKLF) is lodged in Tihar jail where he is serving a life term in the case.
The court listed the matter for further hearing on December 9 and directed that on that day, Malik be made to join the proceedings virtually.
The court was hearing a plea by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) seeking death penalty for Malik in the terror funding case.
Malik had earlier said he wishes to argue in-person against the NIA’s plea seeking enhancement of his punishment from life term to death penalty.
On May 29, 2023, the high court issued notice to Malik on the NIA’s plea and sought his presence before it on the next date.
Subsequently, jail authorities filed an application seeking permission for his virtual appearance on 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 here 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.
Appealing against the sentence, the NIA 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 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.
In his reply filed to the NIA’s appeal, Malik has earlier said that he spent nearly three decades as a key figure in a state-sanctioned “back-channel” mechanism, working with a succession of prime ministers, intelligence chiefs, and even business tycoons to foster peace in Jammu and Kashmir.
In an 85-page affidavit, Malik shared details about his journey – from his school days to links with terrorists and meetings with political leaders.
The NIA, in its rejoinder to Malik’s reply to its plea, had said that taking the names of senior politicians and bureaucrats does not absolve the convict or negate his links with militants like Hafiz Saeed.
It had asserted that Malik was “well connected with multiple terrorist organisations and with supporters of the terrorist organisation LeT” and that he dropped names of senior politicians, media personnel, foreign delegates and bureaucrats to gain popularity and draw public sympathy.
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.
