The Supreme Court on Thursday sought Yasin Malik’s response to a plea by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to transfer the trial in two cases pending against the terror convict from Jammu to New Delhi [Central Bureau of Investigation v. Mohd Yasin Malik].
A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih has asked Malik to file his response by December 14.
The Bench was hearing an appeal filed by the CBI against a Jammu trial court’s order calling for Malik’s physical presence in trial proceedings.
The Jammu special court had sought Malik’s appearance for cross-examination of witnesses in two cases – one concerning the killing of four IAF personnel and the second concerning the abduction of Rubaiya Sayeed, daughter of former Chief Minister Mufti Muhammad Sayeed, in 1989.
The authorities, however, have challenged this order on the ground that there are security risks involved if Malik were to be moved out of Tihar jail (Delhi) and taken to Jammu.
In an earlier hearing, the Supreme Court had suggested that a makeshift courtroom could be set up in jail to physically cross-examine Malik instead of taking him to Jammu for the trials in the pending kidnapping and murder cases.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the CBI today and informed the Bench that a fully functional courtroom is already there in Tihar jail, along with videoconference (VC) facilities.
“There is a fully functional court in (Tihar) Jail itself with all facilities of VC also and in past proceedings have taken place there,” he said.
He added that two applications have been filed in the matter by the CBI, including one to transfer the cases against Malik from Jammu to Delhi.
The top court proceeded to issue notice in the fresh applications and posted the matter for hearing next on December 14.
In April 2023, the Supreme Court had stayed the Jammu trial court order under challenge.
Interestingly, Malik was physically present in the Supreme Court during a July 2023 hearing of the matter, after intimating jail authorities that he wanted to physically attend the hearing. At the time, Justice Dipankar Datta recused from hearing the case.
Shortly thereafter, SG Mehta wrote a strongly worded letter to Home Secretary Ajay Bhalla, stating that Yasin Malik’s presence in the Supreme Court was a grave security lapse.
More recently, while seeking the Delhi High Court’s intervention to seek medical treatment at AIIMS, Malik claimed that the authorities were preventing his physical production before courts under the “garb” of an order passed under Section 268 (orders preventing the removal of persons from jail) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
Malik has, therefore, urged the Delhi High Court to revoke this Section 268 communication and order the authorities to produce him physically before courts as and when his physical presence is required.
