&w=3840&q=100)
Delhi HC seeks Yasin Malik's response on NIA appeal for death penalty
A bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Shalinder Kaur granted Malik four weeks to file his reply and listed the matter for hearing on November 10. The apex court stated that Malik, who is lodged in Tihar Jail, was not produced virtually as directed earlier and had not filed his response in pursuance of its August 9, 2024, order. On that date, the court had ordered his virtual, rather than physical, appearance, citing security threats, the report added
On Monday, the bench directed the jail authorities to produce him virtually on the next hearing date, which is scheduled on November 10.
The case
Malik, the chief of the banned Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, is serving a life term after being convicted in May 2022 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code. He had pleaded guilty to the charges and chosen to argue his case in person.
The trial court, while sentencing him to life imprisonment, said the crimes did not meet the 'rarest of rare' threshold for a death penalty. It also rejected Malik's submission that he had followed the Gandhian principle of non-violence.
NIA had previously argued that Malik had 'tactfully' avoided the death penalty by pleading guilty. 'Any terrorist can come here, do terrorist activities, plead guilty and court says since he has pleaded guilty, I give him only life term and not capital punishment," the NIA said, as quoted by T he Hindu in a 2023 report.
It also alleged that Malik crossed over to Pakistan for training, coordinated stone pelting and spread 'rumours' on social media about oppression by security forces. 'If this is not 'rarest of rare' when someone is continuously, by armed rebellion, killing army people and propagating one region of the nation as separate, there can never be rarest of case. This is rarest of rare case [for awarding a death penalty]... If this is not, what could be,' the NIA said, according to The Hindu.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
NIA probe sought into ‘love jihad' suicide, kin suspect terror links
KOCHI: Alleging that Sona Eldhose, 23, who died by suicide in Kothamangalam on Saturday, was a victim of forced religious conversion attempt as part of 'love jihad', her family has sought a probe by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) into the incident. In a petition to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on Tuesday, they accused the state police of invoking weak sections in the case, and warned that the matter had serious national security implications. Sona's mother, Bindu A K, alleged that the accused, Ramees, 24, had attempted to coerce her daughter to convert to another religion and that the crime may be linked to extremist networks. 'Although the Kerala Police have arrested the accused, they have invoked only weak sections,' the petition said. Bindu also claimed that Panayikkulam in Aluva, where Ramees resides, has a history of anti-national activity, raising suspicion of links to international extremist and terrorist outfits. Panayikkulam had hit national headlines in 2006 when police busted a secret meeting of the banned Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) there — a case later probed by the NIA. It became Kerala's first terrorism case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. 'This is not just about my daughter. It is about protecting other young women from similar exploitation,' she said. Sona's brother, Basil Eldhose, told TNIE that the family has formally urged the chief minister to order an NIA probe. Meanwhile, the Ernakulam rural police have set up a 10-member Special Investigation Team (SIT), led by Muvattupuzha DySP, to look into all angles, including abetment of suicide and rape under the pretext of marriage. All aspects are being examined, say police Ramees' parents have been summoned for questioning. 'The investigation is still in its early stages. Additional charges, including those related to alleged offences related to religious conversion, may be added as the probe progresses,' said Sasi N P, sub-inspector with Kothamangalam station, who led the investigation initially. 'As part of a disciplined force, we cannot disclose further details at this stage. Further information will be provided by the concerned authorities,' he said.
Hindustan Times
5 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Can't strike down a law because of its misuse: SC
The Supreme Court on Tuesday said a law cannot be struck down merely because it could be misused, while agreeing to hear a challenge to Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the new provision replacing sedition in the Indian Penal Code. Can't strike down a law because of its misuse: SC During the Tuesday hearing, senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan argued that Section 152 is effectively identical to the sedition provision that the court had kept in abeyance, and that its vague drafting made it prone to misuse against journalists. 'This case is a shining example of how the provision can be misused… police can come knocking at night,' she said. The bench, however, drew a distinction between legislative power and enforcement: 'The potentiality of abuse…is this a ground to declare a provision unconstitutional? There is a difference between implementation and the power to legislate… Any provision in penal law can be misused,' it observed. The court accepted that vagueness could be a valid ground for striking down a law, citing the Shreya Singhal judgment in 2015, which had invalidated Section 66A of the IT Act, and noted that until there is a 'clear and present threat to integrity and sovereignty, the section is not attracted'. On calls to more precisely define acts threatening sovereignty, the bench said: 'Political dissent cannot be endangering integrity and sovereignty… But inviting legislature to define what is endangering sovereignty is itself dangerous. It has to depend on the facts of each case.' Solicitor General Tushar Mehta pointed out that Section 152 contains an explanatory clause and cautioned that 'merely because the vires of a provision has been challenged, the provision cannot be stayed'. He also submitted that foreign constitutional doctrines may not be applicable given India's distinct Article 19 framework. The debate over Section 152 came even as the bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued notice to the Centre and the Assam government on a petition by The Wire editor Siddharth Varadarajan and members of the Foundation for Independent Journalism, seeking quashing of an FIR registered against them in Morigaon, Assam, for an article on military operations linked to Operation Sindoor. In the course of the hearing the bench said a balance must be struck between the fundamental right to free speech and the need to preserve public order, cautioning that asking the legislature to exhaustively define what could endanger the sovereignty and integrity of the nation would be 'dangerous'. 'No coercive action shall be taken' against the petitioners, the bench ordered, allowing them to join the police probe as and when required. The court tagged the matter with the earlier batch of cases challenging sedition, in which the vires of Section 152 of the BNS is also under scrutiny. The FIR, lodged by a ruling party office-bearer in Assam, accuses The Wire and Varadarajan of publishing on June 29 a report titled 'IAF Lost Fighter Jets to Pak Because of Political Leadership's Constraints': Indian Defence Attache, quoting statements made at a university seminar in Indonesia. The petitioners, however, said the report was factual, quoted the government's version in full, and was based on remarks by India's defence personnel, widely carried by other media outlets. The court clarified it was 'not treating media professionals as a separate class' but 'merely balancing the rights to freedom of speech and the State's right to investigate', remarking: 'There cannot be a present danger to sovereignty just because there is an article or a programme that may not be palatable to some.' The matter will now be heard along with the pending constitutional challenge to sedition's successor provision in the BNS. Last week, a bench led by Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai sought Centre's response on a petition by a retired Army officer SG Vombatkere, challenging the constitutional validity of section 152 of BNS. His petition demonstrated how section 152 criminalises a wide spectrum of expressive conduct, including those who 'purposely or knowingly' use words—spoken, written, electronic, symbolic, or financial -- to 'excite or attempt to excite' secession, rebellion, or subversive activities. It said that such sweeping language fails the test of constitutional validity for being vague and broad, that could have a chilling effect on free speech. Vombatkere had also challenged the earlier provision of Section 124A in IPC as well. It was a batch of petitions led by his plea that the top court in May 2022 directed all criminal proceedings related to sedition to be kept in abeyance. The matter was then referred to a constitution bench. BNS which replaces IPC, came to be enacted by Parliament in December 2023 and was put into effect from July 1, 2024.
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
Ex-lifeguard sentenced to jail ‘till last day of life' for raping 3-year-old student in Greater Noida school
Noida: A special Pocso court on Tuesday convicted and sentenced a former swimming pool lifeguard at a wellknown school chain's Greater Noida campus to life imprisonment "till the last day of his natural life" for sexually assaulting a three-year-old student in 2018. The court, which pronounced a double life term under IPC and the protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, also held the school's management financially liable for failing to protect the child and ordered the two investigating officers of the case to stand trial for "abetting the assault". Judge Vijay Kumar Himanshu of the additional district and sessions court cum special Pocso court convicted the former lifeguard, Chandidas, under Section 376AB of IPC and Section 5(m) of Pocso (aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a child under 12). Chandidas, who is currently out on bail, was also handed another seven-year term under Pocso Act Section 9(f), read with Section 10, for abusing his position as a school employee. You Can Also Check: Noida AQI | Weather in Noida | Bank Holidays in Noida | Public Holidays in Noida | Gold Rates Today in Noida | Silver Rates Today in Noida The court imposed a fine of Rs 24,000 on the convict and ordered the school's managing society to pay Rs 10 lakh in compensation to the girl for rehabilitation within one month, as directed by National Legal Services Authority. The child, then a nursery student, was raped by the lifeguard during swimming class at the school's splash pool on July 12, 2018. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 20 Pieces of Clothing you should Ditch over 40 Learn More Undo She had told her class teacher about the incident. On returning home, she complained of stomach pain and discomfort. She later told her mother that the "swimming pool uncle" had touched her private parts. A medical examination at Delhi's Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital confirmed penetrative sexual assault. An FIR was lodged the next day at Surajpur police station. Chandidas was arrested from the school principal's chamber. Special public prosecutor (Pocso) Chhavanpal Singh said the prosecution presented 12 witnesses and 14 documentary and electronic exhibits and sought the harshest sentence not just for Chandidas but also for the school, which "failed to act as a custodian of its students". The defence argued that the child's family had a grudge against the school and had "tutored" her into making allegations that were unsupported by medical evidence. The court, however, found the child's statements to police, a magistrate and in court consistent and credible, and corroborated by medical findings from GTB Hospital. The testimony of her parents further supported her account. The court described the school management as a "joint tortfeasor" (legal term for an entity committing a tort or a wrongful act), noting that its inaction and suppression attempts directly contributed to the child's trauma. It cited its powers under Section 33(8) read with Section 9 of the Pocso Act to impose the Rs 10 lakh penalty on the school. "Their attempt to suppress and influence the machinery is clearly apparent and palpable, which cannot be done without the active connivance of the school management society. Hence, the court feels that the school management shall be made vicariously liable for the lapses in terms of awarding compensation for the mental trauma suffered by the victim and her family," the judge noted. The court found the roles of the two IOs, Sita Singh and Rashmi Chaudhary, dubious in the investigation. The IOs had filed a closure report against the principal and class teacher despite evidence available on record. "This court finds there is sufficient evidence available on record to show that to shield the co-accused, the principal and class teacher, both the IOs conducted defective and motivated investigation. Therefore, through deliberate and intentional omission in discharge of duty, they have abetted the offence of sexual assault amounting to rape against the child," the court said in its ruling, declaring the two IOs co-accused under Section 17 of the Pocso Act. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
