New Delhi: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta Friday wrote to Union Home Secretary Ajay Bhalla flagging Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) commander Yasin Malik’s appearance Friday in the Supreme Court as a “serious security lapse”.
“A person with terrorist and secessionist background like Mr. Yasin Malik who is not only a convict in 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,” the letter, seen by ThePrint, said.
“Even the security of the Supreme Court also would have been put to a serious risk if any untoward incident were to happen.”
The Kashmiri separatist is undergoing life sentence in Delhi’s Tihar jail after being convicted in a terror funding case.
“I consider this to be a matter serious enough to once again bring it to your personal notice so that suitable action /steps can be taken at your end,” the Solicitor General wrote.
Malik appeared in the Supreme Court during the hearing of an appeal filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), challenging two orders passed in September last year by a Jammu court calling for his physical presence for trial proceedings in two separate cases.
The Jammu court needed Malik’s 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 former J&K chief minister Mufti Muhammad Sayeed, in 1989.
However, the Supreme Court stayed the Jammu’s court orders in April this year. The matter came up before a bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Surya Kant on Friday.
While Justice Datta recused from the case, the bench was taken aback when it learnt that Malik was present despite the fact that no order seeking his physical presence was passed by the court.
Mehta assured the court that he would ensure that Malik is not brought out of jail like this in the future. Additional solicitor general S.V. Raju, appearing for CBI, asserted that Malik was brought out of jail callously by jail authorities.
The matter will be taken up again after four weeks.
‘Everyone was shocked’
Mehta’s letter now says that an order has been passed by the Ministry of Home Affairs with regard to Malik under Section 268 of Criminal Code of Procedure. This provision allows the government to deny removal of convicts of serious offences from prison for security reasons or public interest.
The letter says that “everyone was shocked when news were received that the jail authorities are bringing Mr. Yasin Malik personally to appear before the Hon’ble Supreme Court as per his desire to appear as party in person”.
Mehta then pointed out that neither had the court summoned Malik to be personally present, nor was any permission taken from any authority in the Supreme Court for him to be present in court.
The letter goes on to say that when Mehta enquired from the officer who was incharge of Malik’s security in the Supreme Court, the officer showed him a printed notice in a general format which is sent to every party involved in any matter in the Supreme Court. This printed notice informs the recipients of the notice to appear before the court either in person or through an authorized advocate.
“This is not either the permission of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to bring a convict facing an order under Section 268 of CrPC to come out of jail, nor it is requiring mandatory personal presence of the recipient of the order,” Mehta wrote.
“The jail authorities must be receiving hundreds of such orders /notices daily and have never construed any such order requiring personal presence of either any accused or any convict, much less a convict having an order under Section 268 of CrPC operating against him,” the letter added.
The government’s top law officer asserted that as long as the order under Section 268 of CrPC remains operative, jail authorities had no power to bring him out of jail premises.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: ‘Hardened terrorist’ — NIA appeals Yasin Malik’s life sentence, demands death penalty