Yasin Malik, a Kashmiri freedom fighter, was sentenced to life in prison by a Delhi court in connection with the terror funding case filed against him.
The NIA had sought the death penalty for Yasin Malik, who had previously pleaded guilty to all charges in a terror funding case, including those under the strict Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
The NIA court sentenced two people to life in prison and five people to ten years in prison, all of which will run concurrently. According to NDTV, the Kashmiri leader has also been fined one million dollars.
The Hurriyat leader was convicted in the terror-funding case last week after pleading guilty to all charges, including those under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, on Tuesday (UAPA).
Yasin had refused to contest the charges, which included Sections 16 (terrorist act), 17 (raising funds for a terrorist act), 18 (conspiracy to commit a terrorist act), and 20 (membership in a terrorist gang or organization) of the UAPA, as well as Sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 124-A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code.
The Indian government arrested the Hurriyat leader in 2019, the same year that India’s occupied Jammu, and Kashmir’s special status was revoked.
Malik’s wife, Mushaal Hussein Mullick, called the sentence against her husband illegitimate.
“Indian kangaroo court delivers verdict in minutes,” she tweeted. “The legendary leader will never give up.”
Meanwhile, police used tear gas and pellets to disperse protesters outside the residence of the IOJK’s resistance leader in Srinagar.
Protests have erupted in Srinagar ahead of the Delhi court’s announcement of Yasin Malik’s verdict. The NIA had sought the death penalty for Yasin Malik, who had previously pleaded guilty to all charges in a terror funding case, including those under the strict Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
In an in-chamber hearing, the NIA told Special Judge Praveen Singh that Yasin Malik was to blame for the Kashmiri exodus.
On the issue of the sentence, Yasin Malik reportedly stated that he would not “beg” for mercy and that the court could make its own decision. The court-appointed amicus curiae sought the minimum punishment, i.e., life imprisonment, in the matter.
