New Delhi, Apr 4 (UNI), The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that Kashmiri separatist Yasin Malik will not be physically produced before a Jammu court for trial in cases related to the 1989 assassination of four Indian Air Force officers and the kidnapping of Rubaiya Sayeed.
Instead, he will be allowed to cross-examine witnesses via video conferencing from Tihar Jail.
A bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the Jammu court’s order requiring Malik’s physical production.
The CBI, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, raised serious security concerns regarding his transportation.
The Supreme Court noted that in December 2024, the Central Government issued an order under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), restricting Malik’s movement from Delhi for a year.
In light of this, the Court found it inappropriate to allow his physical production in Jammu.
Further, the Court acknowledged reports from the Registrar General of the Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh High Court and the Tihar Jail Superintendent confirming that both the trial court and Tihar Jail have video conferencing (VC) facilities.
The Court pointed out that Section 530 of the BNSS permits virtual cross-examination of witnesses and that the High Court has guidelines allowing VC use in criminal trials.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Mehta described Malik as a high-risk individual with alleged ties to Lashkar-e-Taiba founder Hafiz Saeed and multiple visits to Pakistan.
The CBI also cited the assassination of a witness as a key reason for opposing Malik’s transportation to Jammu.
Malik, appearing virtually from Tihar Jail, denied being a terrorist, stating, “I am not a terrorist, I am a political leader.” However, Justice Oka made it clear that the Court was not deciding on his guilt but only on the mode of witness cross-examination.
The Court recalled that in July 2023, Supreme Court judges were shocked when Tihar Jail authorities physically produced Malik before the bench due to a misinterpretation of a court order. Justice Dipankar Datta had then recused himself from the case.
Recognizing past security lapses, the Supreme Court had earlier directed the Jammu & Kashmir High Court to ensure proper video-conferencing facilities for Malik’s trial.
Solicitor General Mehta also highlighted that Malik had repeatedly refused to appoint a lawyer, insisting on personal appearances, which he termed as an attempt to “play tricks.”
In May 2022, a Delhi NIA Court sentenced Malik to life imprisonment for charges of conspiracy, waging war against the state, and terror funding after he pleaded guilty.
The NIA has appealed to the Delhi High Court seeking the death penalty for him.
UNI SNG SJC