Kashmiri rebel Yasin Malik was sentenced to life in prison on Wednesday for acts that “planned to strike at the heart of the notion of India,” as well as “committed with the support of foreign powers and designated terrorists,” by an NIA court in Delhi.
Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh handed out two life sentences, as well as a variety of jail terms and a fine of Rs 10,65,000 for offenses under the IPC and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), both of which are strict anti-terror laws.
As a result of rejecting the National Investigation Agency’s request for the death penalty, the court ruled that this case was not among the most unusual in the United States. It has been reported that the NIA has accused Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) commander Omar Abdul Malik of organising violent rallies in 2016, during which 89 incidents of stone-pelting were documented.
Mahatma Gandhi would not have accepted Malik’s assertion that he had renounced violence and would follow his example of nonviolence, the court stated, because he had not condemned the violence in Kashmir.
All accusations, including those brought under the UAPA, were dropped on May 10 when Malik entered a plea of guilty.
“It was designed to strike at the heart of the idea of India and violently separate J&K from Union of India,” the judge stated about Malik’s crimes.
“The crime becomes more serious if it was perpetrated with the support of foreign powers and designated terrorists. According to the court, the crime’s severity is heightened by the fact that it was perpetrated under the cover of a nonviolent political movement.
While testifying, Malik said that in 1994, after giving up violence, he “would follow the peaceful path of Mahatma Gandhi and engage in non-violent political action.
According to the court, he had not undergone any sort of rehabilitation. He may have given up his gun in 1994, but “never showed any contrition for the crimes perpetrated previous to 1994,” according to this statement.
The court ruled that Malik “cannot invoke the Mahatma and claim to be his follower since in Gandhi’s beliefs, there was no space for violence, howsoever high the objective may be. Chauri Chaura was all it took for the Mahatma to call off the non-cooperation movement, but the prisoner, despite widespread violence that had led to it, did not condemn or withdraw his calendar of protest that had sparked it.”
According to Malik, there is no indication that he has supported any terrorist organization in the last 28 years. According to him, the government cannot be labeled a fool for handing a political platform to a terrorist because he has met several former prime ministers, from V P Singh to A B Vajpayee, who engaged with him.
According to the court, he selected a different way to arrange violence disguised as political fight, rather than compromising the government’s good intentions.
Malik claimed that while the NIA had accused him of engaging in terrorist activities after the assassination of Burhan Wani, he was arrested shortly after Wani’s death and “could not have engaged in violent protests”.
“Severe disorder and disturbance in the Valley, resulting in the loss of several lives and damage to property,” said Senior Public Prosecutor Neel Kamal, representing the NIA.
Because Malik opted to wage war against India, the prosecutor said that society should be sent a message and no leniency should be granted. Since the defendant was responsible for the “genocide and migration of Kashmiri Pandits,” he argued that the death sentence should be applied.
For example, when Malik’s home was searched, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) testified to the court that they discovered an original copy of a note, on Hizbul Mujahideen letterhead, signed by representatives of various terror organizations, warning people to distance themselves from football tournament organizers in the Kashmir Valley and to pledge allegiance to the struggle for freedom.
Amicus curiae On the other hand, Akhand Pratap Singh argued that Malik’s guilty plea proved his willingness to repent of his crimes. After the order was pronounced, Malik hugged Singh and thanked him for his aid.
To be precise, Malik was sentenced to life in prison on two counts of terrorism-related offenses, under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) section 121, and the United States Anti-Terrorism Act (UAPA).
On top of that, the court sentenced Malik to 10 years in prison for violating IPC sections 120 B (criminal conspiracy), 121-A (plot to wage war against the Indian government), and UAPA Sections 15 and 18, as well as Sections 20 (membership in a terrorist organization). Sections 13 (unlawful act), 38 (offence linked to membership of terrorism), and 39 (support given to terrorism) of the UAPA were each sentenced to five years in prison. There will be no gaps in the flow of the phrases.
After drafting accusations against Shabir Shah and Yasin Malik, the court said it was “preliminarily established” that they had received money from the terror group Hurriyat/Joint Resistance Leadership (JRL), as well as Rashid Engineer, Altaf Fantoosh, Masrat, and Rashid Engineer.
According to the court, large-scale protests in the Valley, which resulted in violence and fire, were organized as part of a criminal conspiracy.
Previously, it had been reported that Malik had put up an intricate structure and method around the world in order to generate cash for terrorist and other illicit actions in the name of “freedom struggle.”