Delhi High Court Judge Recuses From NIA’s Plea For Death Penalty Against Yasin Malik
NEW DELHI: Delhi High Court judge Amit Sharma recused himself on Thursday from hearing the National Investigation Agency’s (NIA) plea seeking a death penalty for separatist leader Yasin Malik in a terror funding case.
The case has now been listed before a division bench led by Justice Prathiba M Singh, following a change in the roster of judges handling such cases. “List before another bench, of which Justice Sharma is not a member, on August 9,” Justice Singh announced.
Yasin Malik, the chief of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, is currently serving a life sentence in connection with the case. He was virtually present for the court proceedings from Tihar Jail and has been directed to appear virtually on the next hearing date as well.
The high court had initially issued a notice to Malik on May 29 last year in response to the NIA’s plea for a death sentence and had requested his presence for subsequent proceedings. The jail authorities, citing Malik’s status as a “very high-risk prisoner,” requested permission for his virtual appearance, which the court granted to maintain public order and safety.
Malik was sentenced to life imprisonment by a trial court on May 24, 2022, after being found guilty of offenses under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code. He had pleaded guilty to the charges, including those under the UAPA, and was convicted accordingly.
The NIA, appealing against the life sentence, argued that a terrorist should not receive a life term solely for pleading guilty and avoiding trial. The agency stressed that if terrorists could escape the death penalty by pleading guilty, it would undermine the sentencing policy and provide a loophole for terrorists to avoid capital punishment.
The NIA contends that a life sentence is not adequate for the gravity of Malik’s crimes, given the loss of lives suffered by the nation and the families of soldiers. The trial court had previously concluded that Malik’s crimes did not meet the “rarest of the rare” standard required for a death penalty, a conclusion the NIA finds “ex-facie legally flawed and completely unsustainable.”
The trial court had acknowledged that Malik’s actions struck at the “heart of the idea of India” and were aimed at forcefully seceding Jammu and Kashmir from India, but still did not deem the case to warrant the death penalty.
