On April 4, the Supreme Court ruled that Kashmiri separatist Yasin Malik will not be physically produced before the Jammu Court in a trial concerning the 1989 murder of four Indian Air Force (IAF) officers and the kidnapping of Rubaiya Sayeed. Instead, the Court allowed him to cross-examine witnesses via video conferencing from Tihar Jail.
The bench, comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, cited a Central Government order issued in December 2024 under Section 303 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). This order restricts Yasin Malik’s movement outside the National Capital Region for one year, directly impacting his ability to appear in person in Jammu.
“In view of the prohibitory order, his physical production before the Jammu Court is not appropriate,” the Court noted.
Reports from the Registrar General of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, and the Superintendent of Tihar Jail confirmed that both the trial court and the jail have proper video conferencing facilities.
Section 530 of the BNSS permits the use of video conferencing for examining witnesses. The High Court has also set guidelines that allow such methods in criminal trials.
“Video conferencing is a valid alternative under the law for trial proceedings,” said the Court while setting aside the earlier trial court order requiring Malik’s physical presence.
The Supreme Court clarified it was not making any observation on the merits of the case.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, challenged the lower court's order, raising serious security concerns over Malik’s transportation. The CBI cited the earlier assassination of a witness and Malik’s alleged links to banned terror outfits, including Lashkar-e-Taiba’s founder Hafiz Saeed.
“He is a high-risk accused. His travel poses a threat to national security,” the Solicitor General told the bench.
Appearing via video call from Tihar Jail, Yasin Malik insisted that he was a political figure, not a terrorist. Responding to the CBI’s accusations, Malik said:
“There is not a single FIR against me or my organization for aiding militants. All charges are related to non-violent protests.”
However, Justice Oka clarified:
“We are not deciding whether you are a terrorist or a political leader. The issue before us is limited to whether you should be allowed to examine witnesses through video conferencing.”
Previous Proceedings And Background
Earlier in July 2023, the Supreme Court was surprised when Malik was brought physically before it, which turned out to be a mistake by the Tihar Jail authorities. The CBI had then assured that such an incident would not happen again, and security protocols would be strengthened.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Allows Jharkhand Govt to Cut Power Supply on Ram Navami Routes to Prevent Electrocution
In April 2023, the Supreme Court stayed the Jammu trial court's order which had directed Malik’s physical appearance. At that time, the Court had also questioned the reliability of video conferencing in Jammu and even suggested conducting the trial within Tihar Jail as an alternative.
In January, the top court directed the Jammu & Kashmir High Court to install proper video conferencing equipment in the Jammu court trying Malik's case.
Later, the CBI sought to modify its appeal to include Malik's co-accused. Notices were sent to the new respondents and a transfer application was filed as well.
The Solicitor General expressed concerns that Malik had consistently avoided engaging a lawyer and insisted on being present personally during hearings. He said:
“This appears to be a tactic. He hasn’t hired a lawyer even for this petition.”
In May 2022, a special NIA Court sentenced Malik to life imprisonment after he pleaded guilty to charges of terrorism, conspiracy, and waging war against the Indian state. The NIA has since approached the Delhi High Court seeking the death penalty for him.
Case no. – SLP(Crl) No. 5526-5527/2023
Case Title – CBI v. Mohd Yasin Malik
