Srinagar: After years of delay, Kashmir’s notarial paedophile predator Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh was convicted for sexually abusing multiple minors over a decade.
Judge Mir Wajahat in an unprecedented move composed an English poem called Whispers of Faith and Echoes of Fear, depicting the gravity of the case.
Whispers of Faith, Echoes of Fear
He stood adorned in robes of light, A shepherd sworn to guide the night.
With whispered prayers and sacred hands, He sowed the faith in shifting sands.
A child approached with eyes so wide, Seeking solace, safe inside.
But shadows stretched behind the glow, Where whispered words turned cold as snow.
“Fear the Jinn, but trust in me, I hold the key, I set you free.”
Yet chains were forged in holy guise, Where trust was lost in silent cries.
A touch, a word, a hollow stare, The scent of faith laced with despair.
A promise spun in webs unseen, A nightmare veiled in what had been.
Years will pass, the wounds remain, The echoes whisper through the pain.
For what was torn can’t just repair, A soul once bound floats in the air.
But truth will rise, the stars will call, No shadow stands where justice falls.
And though the scars may never fade, The dawn will break—unafraid.
The Big Picture
Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh, a self-proclaimed spiritual healer in Jammu and Kashmir, was convicted on February 17, 2025, under Section 377 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) for sexually abusing multiple minors over a decade. The case, marked by delayed reporting, psychological coercion, and systemic exploitation of religious authority, underscores the challenges of prosecuting sexual crimes in communities where societal stigma silences victims.
Between the Line
The trial revealed how Sheikh, known locally as “Pir Baba,” manipulated families into sending children to him for spiritual healing, only to subject them to repeated sexual abuse. Victims testified that he used threats of supernatural harm (via “Jinns”) to ensure their silence. The FIR was filed in 2016 four years after the abuse began highlighting the trauma and fear that delayed disclosure.
The Prosecution’s Case
Victim Testimonies: Multiple survivors, including PW8 (the first to come forward), described near-identical patterns of abuse: isolation, coercion through religious rituals, and threats of family harm.
Legal Precedents: The court cited State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996), ruling that delays in reporting sexual crimes are common and do not invalidate victims’ accounts.
Psychological Impact: Witnesses reported lasting trauma, with one noting they “pretended to walk normally” to hide injuries from parents.
The Defense’s Arguments
Alleged Financial Motive: Sheikh claimed the case was fabricated over a ₹8 lakh debt, but the court dismissed this due to lack of evidence.
Procedural Challenges: The defence argued missing medical evidence and vague timelines, but the court emphasized that sexual violence often leaves no physical traces and upheld the credibility of victim narratives.
The Court’s Ruling
Credibility Over Contradictions: Minor inconsistencies in testimonies were deemed insufficient to override the “consistent, graphic” accounts of abuse.
Rejection of Delay Defence: The court noted threats and societal shame justified the 2016 FIR, citing Tulsidas Kanolkar v. State of Goa (2003).
Joint Trial Rationale: Only two victims (PW3 and PW8) were included in the joint trial due to overlapping timelines; others must file separate cases.
What’s Next
Sentencing: Sheikh faces consecutive sentences under Section 377 RPC, which criminalizes “unnatural offences.”
Appeals: The defence may challenge the verdict, particularly after India’s 2023 adoption of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which repealed Section 377. However, the court affirmed that pending cases under old laws remain valid.
Broader Impact: Advocates urge authorities to fast-track cases for other victims identified during the trial.
The Bottom Line
This case sets a precedent for handling child sexual abuse in contexts where perpetrators weaponize cultural and religious authority. By prioritizing victim testimony over procedural technicalities, the judgment reinforces that trauma-informed justice is possible—even in the face of delayed reporting and societal pressure.
