Delhi Court Convicts Dukhtaran-E-Millat Founder for Anti-India Activities
A Delhi court has delivered a significant verdict, convicting Asiya Andrabi, the founder of the women's separatist outfit Dukhtaran-E-Millat (DeM), along with her associates Sofi Fehmeeda and Nahida Nasreen. The court found them guilty of waging war against the country under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Rejection of Constitutional Allegiance
In a detailed order made available on Thursday, NIA court judge Chander Jit Singh stated that the accused did not bear allegiance to the Constitution of India. The judge emphasized that they actively worked for Kashmir's secession from India. Their actions struck at the very idea of national integrity, according to the court's findings.
The court noted that the trio vociferously sought Kashmir's separation on religious grounds. Their consistent calls for secession amounted to a complete rejection of India's constitutional framework. This stance formed a key part of the prosecution's case against them.
Endorsement of Violent Means
The court cited specific instances to support its conviction. It mentioned that Andrabi sought support from Pakistan-based platforms. In a 2018 interview, she stated that "gun is a must" for a referendum. The court ruled that such statements went beyond mere political dissent.
These remarks reflected an endorsement of violent means to achieve secession, the judge observed. This evidence played a crucial role in establishing the charges under UAPA and IPC.
Contradiction in Defence Arguments
The defence argued for a right to self-determination based on UN resolutions. However, the court flagged a clear contradiction in this position. It noted that while the accused claimed such a right, they simultaneously asserted that Kashmir was part of Pakistan.
They described Kashmir as under "illegal occupation" by India. This contradiction undermined their defence, according to the court's analysis. The judge found their stance inconsistent with legal principles.
The conviction marks a pivotal moment in cases involving separatist activities in Kashmir. It underscores the legal consequences for actions deemed as waging war against the nation. The court's order details the evidence and reasoning behind this landmark decision.
