Procedural Hurdles Ease in Aasiya Andrabi Terror Conspiracy Case as Defence Files No-Objection
The legal limbo surrounding the sentencing of Kashmiri separatist Aasiya Andrabi and her two associates in a high-profile 2018 terror conspiracy case has taken a significant step toward resolution. On Tuesday, the defence formally submitted a written statement expressing no objection to Karkardooma family court judge Chanderjit Singh proceeding with the sentencing order.
Court Directives and Agency Response
This development follows an earlier directive from the court, which had instructed the defence team to file a written no-objection to clarify their position. Upon submission of this document, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) requested additional time to take necessary instructions and formulate its official stance on the matter.
The case has now been scheduled for a hearing on February 23, where the NIA is expected to present its written stand. This procedural advancement marks a crucial turning point in a case that has been mired in jurisdictional and definitional complexities.
Background: Jurisdictional and Definitional Challenges
The sentencing process had previously stalled due to a fundamental legal question: whether the term 'judgment' in this context refers exclusively to the conviction order or also encompasses the subsequent sentencing phase. This ambiguity created significant procedural delays and required judicial clarification.
Judge Chanderjit Singh initially presided over the matter as an additional sessions judge in the specialized NIA court. However, in November 2025, he was transferred to the family court at Karkardooma. Despite this administrative change, since the case had already been reserved for judgment, he proceeded to pronounce the verdict on January 14, convicting all three accused individuals.
As the case inherently fell within the jurisdiction of the NIA court, judge Prashant Sharma subsequently transferred it back to Singh specifically for the sentencing phase. This transfer underscored the importance of maintaining jurisdictional integrity while ensuring judicial continuity.
Implications and Next Steps
The defence's written no-objection represents a strategic legal move that simplifies the procedural landscape. By formally waiving any objections to Judge Singh handling the sentencing, the defence has effectively removed one potential obstacle to concluding this long-running case.
The NIA's forthcoming written stand on February 23 will be critical in determining the final sentencing proceedings. Legal experts suggest that the agency's position could influence the timing and nature of the sentencing hearing, potentially bringing closure to a case that has attracted significant national attention.
This development highlights the intricate balance between judicial procedure, jurisdictional boundaries, and the pursuit of justice in complex terror-related cases. The resolution of these procedural questions paves the way for the final chapter in this legal saga, with all eyes now on the February 23 hearing.
