J-K terror funding case: Yasin Malik seeks to argue personally

New Delhi [India], August 9 : Kashmiri separatist leader Yasin Malik on Friday expressed his desire to argue his terror funding case in person and has rejected the Delhi High Court's advice to either appoint a lawyer of his choice or designate amicus curiae to assist the case.
The bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Girish Katpalia scheduled the next hearing for September 19 and advised Yasin Malik to reconsider his decision regarding the filing of written submissions in the case.
The court has granted Yasin Malik one more opportunity to reconsider his decision. It also clarified that, in accordance with the August 4, 2023, order from the predecessor bench, Malik can attend the hearing only through virtual mode and present his case accordingly.
During the proceedings, Malik personally addresses the court via video conference, stating that he will represent himself and does not require legal counselling.
The submissions of Malik came during the hearing of the NIA plea seeking the death penalty for him.
On the last date of hearing, Justice Amit Sharma of Delhi High Court recused himself from hearing the National Investigation Agency (NIA)'s appeal seeking capital/death penalty for Kashmiri separatist leader in the terror funding case.
NIA in May 2023 had moved Delhi HC challenging Trial Court order awarding life imprisonment to Yasin Maliker.
Appearing for NIA, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta earlier submitted that Yasin Malik is responsible for killing four IAF personnel and kidnapping of Rubaiya Sayeed. He also submitted that four terrorists, who were released after the kidnapping masterminded 26/11 Mumbai attacks.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta further submitted that, accused Malik crossed over to Pakistan in 1980s to recieve training in handling weapons and ISI helped him to become head of JKLF.
NIA in its appeal stated that if such dreaded terrorists are not given capital punishment only on the ground that they have pleaded guilty, then the same will result in complete erosion of the sentencing policy of the country and will result into creation of a device, whereby, such dreaded terrorist after indulging, waging and spearheading an "act of war against the state", in case caught, would have a way out to avoid capital punishment.
NIA in its appeal further stated that the crime committed by such dreaded terrorists, where due to their 'act of war', the nation has lost its valuable soldiers and have perpetrated irreparable greif not only to the family members of the soldiers but to the entire nation.
NIA also stated that the respondent/accused over decades has been indulging and spearheading terrorist activities in the valley and with the help of dreaded foreign terrorist organisations, having interest inimical to India, has been masterminding, planning, engineering and executing armed rebellion in the valley in an attempt to usurp the soverenigty and integrity of a part of India.
NIA in its appeal before Delhi HC further stated that the offences committed by the respondent accused are ex-facie acts of "external aggression", brazenly planned and executed by "acts of waging war against the nation" whereby "internal disturbance" was created through raising and using trained armed militia within the state and by helping trained terrorist, raised in enemy states, to infiltrate the borders of India to participate and catalyse such internal disturbances.
Earlier on May 25, 2022, the trial court Judge while sentencing him to life imprisonment said there was no reformation of the convict. It may be correct that the convict may have given up the gun in the year 1994, but he had never expressed any regret for the violence he had committed prior to the year 1994.
It is to be noticed that, when he claimed to have given up the path of violence after the year 1994, the government of India took it upon its face value and gave him an opportunity to reform and in good faith, tried to engage in a meaningful dialogue with him and as admitted by him, gave him every platform to express his opinion, said NIA Judge Praveen Singh.
The crime becomes more serious as it was committed with the assistance of foreign powers and designated terrorists. The seriousness of crime is further increased by the fact that it was committed behind the smoke screen of an alleged peaceful political movement, added the trial court.
"The manner of the commission of crime, the kind of weaponry used in the crime lead me to a conclusion that the crime in question would fail the test of rarest of rare cases," NIA Judge Praveen Singh said.
The NIA court while sentencing life imprisonment to Malik also imposed a fine of above Rs 10 lakh. He was sentenced to life imprisonment twice (one for waging war against the nation and one in UAPA sec 17 raising funds for terror act).