Terrorists’ Misuse of Social Media and Use of Journalistic Information to Incite Violence Are Factors Considered in Sentencing: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court held that factors such as misuse of social media platforms by terrorists and use of journalistic credentials to publish magazines to incite violence are factors that cannot be ignored while imposing punishment in cases related to terrorist activities.

A dividing bench consisting of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma He observed that in such cases, courts will need to take into account not only the crime committed but also the impact of that crime and the individual’s propensity to commit a similar crime in the future.

“While encrypted platforms allow and promote privacy and freedom of speech and expression, their misuse by terrorists and proscribed organizations must also be countered. “On my mind,” said the Court.

He added that such cases need to be addressed. It is different from cases involving innocent people who may have been dragged into a crime without their knowledge.

“Factors such as funding through Bitcoins and the use of journalistic information to publish and distribute magazines that incite violence cannot be excluded,” the report said.

The bench made the observations while examining the appeals filed by two convicts, Hina Bashir Beigh and Sadiya Anwar Shaikh, seeking reduction of their sentences in the UAPA case.

The NIA had alleged that the convicts were linked to the banned terrorist organization Islamic organisation. They were carrying out anti-national activities in the Khorasan State Government and India.

The investigation agency also cited ‘Voice of Hind’ etc. based on the statement made by Beigh. He claimed that incriminating anti-nationalist magazines called were seized. It was alleged that the accused created numerous anonymous identities on social media platforms in order to hide his identity while engaging in anti-citizenship activities.

In May, the NIA court had sentenced Beigh to eight years imprisonment under Article 38(2) of the UAPA and eight years imprisonment under Article 39(2) of the UAPA. no good.

On the other hand, Shaikh was sentenced to seven years imprisonment under Section 38 of UAPA and seven years imprisonment under Section 39 of UAPA. All sentences were to be executed simultaneously. The prison sentence was a simple prison sentence.

Observing that the spread of crime through the internet and social media platforms cannot be ignored, the Panel analyzed the factors and principles that courts in different jurisdictions take into account when imposing sentences in terrorism-related cases. Although specific guidelines have not been introduced at the policy level in India, the factors to be considered in imposing penalties are similar to those in other jurisdictions.

“When sentencing for terrorism-related activities, courts will have to take into account not only the crime committed, but also its impact and the person’s tendency to commit a similar crime in the future. The Court stated that the purpose behind providing the range of punishment that can be imposed for an offense is to give the Courts sufficient discretion to take into account various aggravating and mitigating factors while imposing sentences.

The bench observed that the fact that both the convicts were women who were not fully aware of all the plans of the main accused may have been mitigating factors, but they were related to the main accused. The circumstances under which they were seen inciting violence through broadcasts during the CAA-NRC protests should also be kept in mind.

Regarding Hina Bashir Beigh, the Court commuted the sentence of 8 years’ imprisonment for each of the crimes to 6 years’ imprisonment.

Regarding Sadiya Anwar Shaikh, the Court commuted her 7-year imprisonment to 6-year imprisonment for the crimes. Neither convict was given any fine for either crime.

Title: HINA BASHIR BEIGH – NIA and other related matters

Click here to read the rankings