Deterrence is in relation to the crime committed and correction is in relation to the criminal: Delhi Court

Deterrence is in relation to the crime committed and correction is in relation to the criminal: Delhi Court

The Delhi Court stated that the deterrence is in relation to the crime committed and correction is in relation to the criminal.

Background 

The socio economic report of convict Mohd. Yasin Malik reflects that the convict owns a three storey residential house at Maisuma Lal Chowk, Srinagar where his mother and divorced sister along with her 2 sons used to reside. With regard to social status of convict, it is submitted that the convict was acting as JKLF Chairman and was an influential person. He had a number of supporters within his locality before declaration of JKIF as banned organization. It is further submitted that the family of convict consists of 11 members including his mother, wife, 3 sisters, one daughter, two nephews and three maternal uncles. In order to further find the chances of reformation, the court had summoned the convict’s conduct report from the jail. 

Arguments 

Neel Kamal, Senior PP for NIA, during the course of arguments on sentence, has drawn the attention of the court to various paras of order on charge where the allegations against the convict and findings of the court on those allegations had been given. 

He contended that the acts of the convict had led to severe chaos and unrest in the valley and had resulted in loss of numerous lives and damage to property. The acts for which convict had conspired had been found to be terrorist acts. The convict has also found to be engaged in activitics of terror funding, being a member of terrorist gang and supporting terrorist organizations as well as for offences u/s 121 IPC and 121A IPC whercby he had been found to have waged war against UOI. The convict has not denied these allegations and chose not to contest these allegations. 

Convict Yasccn Malik contended that he had given up violence in the year 1994. Before the year 1994, he had picked up a gun and he had never shied away from this fact and at that time also, he was known by his name as a person who was engaged in armed struggle. After the cease fire in the year 1994, he had declared that he would follow the peaceful path of Mahatma Gandhi and would engage in nonviolent political struggle. 

He further contended that since then there is no evidence against him that in the last 28 ycars, he had provided any hide out to any militant or had provided any logistic support to any terrorist organization. 

Decision 

Addl. sessions judge Parveen Singh noted that the manner in which the crime was committed was in the form of conspiracy whereby there was an attempted insurrection by instigating, stone pelting and arson and a very large scale violence led to shut of the government machinery and ultimate accession of J&K from UOI. 

The court said that the manner of the commission of crime, the kind of weapons used in the crime lead it to a conclusion that the crime in question would fail the test of rarest of rare cases as laid down by Supreme Court. 

The court found that as this issue is neither before the court, nor has been adjudicated upon and the court cannot allow itself to be swayed by this argument. 

The court accordingly found that this case does not call for awarding the death sentence as demanded. 

The court sentenced the convict to life imprisonment. 

Case title: State (National Investigation Agency) v/s Mohd. Yasin Malik

Citation: RC-10/2017/NIA/DLI

Click here to read the Order/Judgment

JurisHour
JurisHour
JurisHour is the fastest online portal for Indian legal news.

1 Comment

  1. yxo says:

    Touche. Soolid arguments. Keepp upp thee great spirit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *