In a major security risk, Kashmiri separatist leader Yasin Malik was physically presented at the Supreme Court today (21st July) for a hearing, even though the apex court did not summon him. Yasin Malik is undergoing a life sentence in Tihar jail after being convicted in a terror funding case, and he appeared at the court in the hearing of an appeal by CBI against a Jammu court order.
A bench of justices, Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta, recused from hearing the matter but noted that there was no such order passed by it asking Yasin Malik to present before it. The court expressed shocked at the presence of Malik in the court.
The top court remarked there are virtual modes available for appearance in the court, and Malik need not be brought to the court physically.
Appearing for Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, apprised the court that there was no order passed by the top court that Yasin Malik has to be presented before the apex court physically in the matter. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta apprised the top court that the Ministry of Home Affairs has issued a direction that he would not be brought out from jail.
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju called it a serious security issue.
Later in the day, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta wrote a letter to Home Secretary Ajay Bhalla, flagging the issue of security to Malik. Stating that Yasin Malik’s presence in Supreme Court was a serious security lapse raising apprehension that he could have escaped, forcibly taken away or could have been killed, Mehta said, “It is my firm view that this is a serious security lapse. A person with a terrorist and secessionist background like Mr Yasin Malik who is not only a convict in a terror funding case but has known connections with terror organisations in Pakistan could have escaped, could have been forcibly taken away or could have been killed.”
In his letter to Bhalla, Mehta further said that even the security of the Supreme Court also would have been put at serious risk if any untoward incident were to happen.
“In any view of the matter so long as the order under section 268 of CrP Code subsists, jail authorities had no power to bring him out of jail premises nor did they have any reason to do so,” the SG said.
The Solicitor General further said that considering this to be a matter serious enough to once again bring it to your personal notice so that suitable action and steps can be taken at your end.
In the letter, it was mentioned about an order passed by the Ministry of Home Affairs with regard to the said Yasin Malik under section 268 Criminal Code of Procedure which prevents the jail authorities to bring the said convict out of the jail premises for security reasons.
“Everyone was shocked when news was received that the jail authorities are bringing Yasin Malik personally to appear before the Supreme Court as per his desire to appear as party in person,” he said.
The letter also mentioned that the SG had telephonically intimated Home Secretary about this fact, however, by that time Yasin Malik had already reached the precincts of the Supreme Court of India.
Neither the Court had summoned his personal presence nor was any permission taken from any authority of the Supreme Court of India in this regard.
“When I enquired from the officer who was in charge of the security of Mr Yasin Malik in the Supreme Court, the only thing he could show me was a printed notice in a general format of the Supreme Court which is sent with regard to every party to any matter in the Court. The said printed notice informs the recipients of the notice to appear before the Court either in person or through an authorised Advocate,” SG said.
He also said that printed notice in a general format of the Supreme Court is not either the permission of the Supreme Court to bring a convict facing an order under section 268 of CrP Code to come out of jail nor it is requiring mandatory personal presence of the recipient of the order. way or could have been killed.”
It is notable that CBI has filed an appeal against the order of Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu(TADA/POTA) dated September 20 and September 21 issuing a production warrant against him in two different cases.
Jammu Court has sought Malik’s physical appearance for cross-examination of witnesses in relation to the killing of four Indian Air Force (IAF) personnel and abduction of Rubaiya Sayeed, daughter of Mufti Muhammad Sayeed in 1989. However, the top court in the last hearing stayed the Jammu’s court order.
