The Patiala House court in the case of NIA v. Yasin Malik found Malik guilty of violating the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code, after him pleading guilty.
Yasin Malik, the leader of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front and a Kashmiri separatist, was sentenced to life in jail by a Special National Investigation Agency (NIA) Court in Delhi on Wednesday in a terror funding case.
After pleading guilty in the case, Special Judge Parveen Singh convicted Malik on May 19 of violating the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) as well as the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for plotting and waging war against India.
The following are the punishments meted out to Malik for various offences:
Section 121 IPC (waging war against the Indian government) carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment and a monetary penalty of INR 10,000.
- 10 years in prison and a INR 10,000 fine under section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (criminal conspiracy);
- 10 years in jail and a INR10,000 fine under section 121A of the Indian Penal Code (conspiracy to commit offences punishable under section 121)
- 5 years in jail under Section 13 of the UAPA (penalty for unauthorised conduct);
- Ten years in jail under Section 15 of the UAPA (terrorism legislation);
- Section 17 UAPA (penalty for collecting funding for terrorist acts) carries a life sentence and a fine of ten lakh rupees.
- 10 years in prison and a INR10,000 fine under Section 18 of the UAPA (punishment for corruption);
- Section 20 UAPA (penalty for membership in a terrorist gang or organisation) carries a 10-year sentence and a INR 10,000 fine.
- Sections 38 (membership in a terrorist organisation) and 39 (support supplied to a terrorist organisation) of the UAPA carry a five-year sentence and a INR 5,000 fine.
The sentences will all run at the same time.
The amicus curiae was said to have visited the accused in prison to have legal consultations with him so that he could be informed of the highest punishment that might be imposed on him if he entered a guilty plea and the benefits and drawbacks of his plea.
Malik also pleaded guilty to the allegations levelled against him after that.
The Court noted that Malik had pleaded guilty to the accusations against him freely and after adequate legal consultation and full knowledge of the implications.
His plea is accordingly accepted
The Court said in it’s conviction order
It had so found him convicted of offences for violating Indian Penal Code Sections 120B, 121, 121A, and UAPA Sections 13 and 15 read with Indian Penal Code Section 120B, as well as UAPA Sections 17, 18, 20, 38, and 39.
The Court had already framed accusations in March after finding that Malik and Shabir Shah, Rashid Engineer, Altaf Fantoosh, Masrat, and the Hurriyat/Joint Resistance Leadership (JRL) were the direct recipients of terror financing.
