NEW DELHI: Noting that terrorism must be dealt with sternly, Delhi HC has rejected the plea of a terror convict seeking merging of two sentences in two different cases.
The petitioner pleaded that since he had voluntarily pleaded guilty in both cases, HC should allow his seven-year sentence in a UAPA case for conspiring to establish an IS base in India run “concurrently” with the sentence imposed upon him in another case, wherein he conspired to carry out an attack in Haridwar during the Ardh Kumbh Mela and raised funds for the same.The petitioner said he was a young, poor and illiterate man who had a genuine desire to reform himself, obtain an education and become a productive member of society.
Dismissing the petition, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma emphasised that the offence committed by petitioner Mohsin Ibrahim Sayyed was grave and had impacted national security and communal harmony. “Terrorism not only threatens the national security of the country but also the very fabric of society by targeting innocent civilians and institutions indiscriminately, with an aim to instil fear among the common and innocent citizens of a country,” the court noted in a recent order. “They also result in loss of innocent lives, destruction of property and destabilisation of regions. These impacts are often long-lasting. Thus, the gravity of such crimes lies in their potential to cause widespread harm, both physically and psychologically, and their challenge to fundamental values of peace, tolerance and coexistence in a nation,” it stated.
“Since a lenient view has already been taken by trial courts at the stage of sentencing, no further leniency can be granted to the petitioner by allowing concurrent running of sentences… ,” it concluded.
The petitioner pleaded that since he had voluntarily pleaded guilty in both cases, HC should allow his seven-year sentence in a UAPA case for conspiring to establish an IS base in India run “concurrently” with the sentence imposed upon him in another case, wherein he conspired to carry out an attack in Haridwar during the Ardh Kumbh Mela and raised funds for the same.The petitioner said he was a young, poor and illiterate man who had a genuine desire to reform himself, obtain an education and become a productive member of society.
Dismissing the petition, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma emphasised that the offence committed by petitioner Mohsin Ibrahim Sayyed was grave and had impacted national security and communal harmony. “Terrorism not only threatens the national security of the country but also the very fabric of society by targeting innocent civilians and institutions indiscriminately, with an aim to instil fear among the common and innocent citizens of a country,” the court noted in a recent order. “They also result in loss of innocent lives, destruction of property and destabilisation of regions. These impacts are often long-lasting. Thus, the gravity of such crimes lies in their potential to cause widespread harm, both physically and psychologically, and their challenge to fundamental values of peace, tolerance and coexistence in a nation,” it stated.
“Since a lenient view has already been taken by trial courts at the stage of sentencing, no further leniency can be granted to the petitioner by allowing concurrent running of sentences… ,” it concluded.