Delhi Court Convicts Hurriyat Leader Aasiya Andrabi in a Fabricated Case, Exposing India’s Judicial Weaponization in IIOJK

A Politically Driven Verdict, Not Justice

The conviction of Hurriyat leader and Dukhtaran-e-Millat chief Aasiya Andrabi by a Delhi court is widely seen in Kashmir as a political verdict designed to silence dissent rather than deliver justice. The case, registered under the harsh Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), reflects how India uses special laws to criminalize political belief in Indian illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). This decision reinforces the perception that Indian courts often act in line with state policy when Kashmiri voices challenge New Delhi’s narrative. For ordinary Kashmiris, the message is clear: peaceful political resistance will be punished.

♦ State power over law: The conviction shows how Indian institutions align with government policy when cases involve Kashmiri leaders who question India’s control over the region.
♦ Criminalizing belief: Political views and speeches are treated as crimes under UAPA, exposing the law’s misuse against non-violent dissent.
♦ Fear as policy: The verdict aims to intimidate society by making an example of a well-known female leader.

Use of UAPA as a Tool of Suppression

The application of Sections 18 and 38 of UAPA in this case highlights how the law has become India’s preferred weapon to crush opposition in Kashmir. These provisions allow wide interpretation, enabling authorities to label political activity as “terror-linked” without solid proof. Rights groups argue that UAPA reverses basic legal principles by favoring the state over the accused. In Kashmir, this law has normalized long detention, delayed trials, and predetermined outcomes.

♦ Black law exposure: UAPA is repeatedly used to jail Kashmiris without strong evidence, proving its role as a political tool rather than a security law.
♦ Denial of fair trial: Broad charges under UAPA make acquittal nearly impossible, even in weak cases.
♦ Silencing strategy: The law’s real aim is to discourage political participation through fear of arrest and conviction.

Role of NIA in Targeting Kashmiri Voices

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) arrested Aasiya Andrabi in April 2018, setting the stage for years of legal harassment. The agency is frequently criticized for acting as an extension of the BJP-led government, especially in Kashmir-related cases. Instead of independent investigation, the NIA often relies on selective evidence and ideological labeling. Its involvement has turned political cases into national security trials by design.

♦ Agency with bias: The NIA’s pattern in Kashmir cases shows political motivation rather than neutral investigation.
♦ Narrative building: Charges are framed to fit India’s claim that all resistance equals extremism.
♦ Extended punishment: Long pre-trial detention itself becomes a form of punishment.

Targeting of Dukhtaran-e-Millat and Women Leadership

Dukhtaran-e-Millat, founded in 1987, represents women-led political awareness in Kashmir, which India finds threatening. By banning the organization and convicting its leader, the state aims to weaken grassroots resistance. The move also reflects gendered repression, where female political leadership is deliberately crushed. India’s actions show fear of organized Kashmiri women speaking for their rights.

♦ Women under pressure: Female leadership is targeted to discourage broader participation by Kashmiri women.
♦ Ban as control: Outlawing organizations helps India erase independent political platforms.
♦ Symbolic punishment: Andrabi’s conviction is meant to break morale beyond one individual.

Judiciary’s Complicity in Occupied Kashmir

The case was heard at Patiala House Court by Additional Sessions Judge Chander Jit Singh, raising serious questions about judicial independence. Kashmiri observers note that verdicts in such cases often appear pre-decided. Courts that should protect constitutional rights instead legitimize state repression. This undermines India’s claim of rule of law in Kashmir.

♦ Rubber-stamp justice: Courts frequently approve state narratives without challenging weak evidence.
♦ Selective application of law: Rights enjoyed elsewhere in India are denied to Kashmiris.
♦ Loss of trust: Such verdicts deepen public mistrust in Indian institutions.

Family Persecution and Long-Term Injustice

The suffering of Aasiya Andrabi’s family exposes the depth of Indian repression. Her husband, Ashiq Hussain Faktoo, has spent nearly three decades in prison after receiving a life sentence in 2003 in what rights groups call a fabricated case. Even after completing over 20 years in detention, his plea for release was rejected. This reflects a pattern of lifelong punishment for Kashmiri political families.

♦ Collective punishment: Families of leaders are deliberately targeted to intensify pressure.
♦ Endless imprisonment: Life sentences are stretched to deny any hope of release.
♦ Psychological warfare: Long incarceration aims to break resistance through exhaustion.

India’s Democratic Claims vs Ground Reality

While India promotes itself globally as the world’s largest democracy, its actions in Kashmir expose deep hypocrisy. Political leaders are jailed, organizations banned, and dissent equated with treason. The Andrabi case clearly shows the gap between India’s international image and its conduct in IIOJK. Democracy cannot exist where political belief is criminalized.

♦ Double standards: Rights promised under the constitution are denied in Kashmir.
♦ Image management: India hides repression behind democratic slogans.
♦ Occupied mindset: Kashmir is governed through control, not consent.

International Silence and Moral Failure

Despite repeated reports by rights groups, global reaction to such cases remains weak. Strategic interests often outweigh human rights concerns when it comes to India. This silence emboldens New Delhi to continue repression without accountability. For Kashmiris, international inaction feels like silent approval.

♦ Muted response: Global powers avoid confronting India despite clear abuses.
♦ Encouraging repression: Silence sends a message that India can act without consequences.
♦ Urgent accountability needed: Strong international pressure is essential to stop further injustice.

A Verdict Against Justice

The conviction of Aasiya Andrabi is not an isolated legal event but part of a wider system designed to crush Kashmiri political identity. It exposes how laws, agencies, and courts are used together to silence dissent in occupied Kashmir. India’s harsh approach may deliver temporary control, but it deepens anger and injustice. History shows that repression cannot erase a people’s demand for dignity and rights.

♦ Political punishment exposed: The case proves dissent is treated as a crime in IIOJK.
♦ Systemic injustice: Courts, laws, and agencies operate in coordination against Kashmiris.
♦ Resistance endures: Despite repression, the Kashmiri struggle for rights continues.