Delhi HC Hears Engineer Rashid’s Bail Plea In NIA Stone-Pelting Conspiracy Case, Lists Matter For March 11

The Delhi High Court on February 19 heard preliminary arguments in the regular bail plea filed by Baramulla Member of Parliament Abdul Rashid Sheikh, popularly known as Engineer Rashid, who has been in custody since August 2019 in a case registered by the National Investigation Agency alleging a larger conspiracy relating to funding and support for separatist activities and stone pelting incidents in Jammu and Kashmir.

A Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain took up the matter and, after hearing the initial submissions on behalf of the appellant, listed the plea for further hearing on March 11, when the National Investigation Agency is expected to advance its response.

Sheikh has been in judicial custody for more than six and a half years in connection with the case, which was originally registered in 2017.

Appearing for him, Senior Advocate N. Hariharan, along with advocates Vikhyat Oberoi and Nishita Gupta, submitted that the length of incarceration and the pace of the trial justified the grant of regular bail. It was argued that despite the passage of several years since his arrest, the trial has progressed slowly and is unlikely to conclude in the near future.

Placing the stage of the trial on record, the defence submitted that out of 378 prosecution witnesses cited by the agency, only 33 witnesses have been examined so far.

In view of the large number of witnesses remaining to be examined, it was contended that continued detention would amount to prolonged pre-trial incarceration without a foreseeable conclusion of the proceedings.

The senior counsel further argued that Sheikh’s case stands on a different footing from that of the other accused persons. He informed the Court that although the charge sheet includes allegations of conspiracy, the trial court had discharged Sheikh of the allegation relating to providing support to a terrorist organisation under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

It was also pointed out that Sheikh had earlier been granted interim bail on two occasions and had complied with all the conditions imposed by the Court.

This, according to the defence, demonstrated that he was not a flight risk and that he would abide by any conditions that may be imposed in the event of regular bail being granted.

During the course of the hearing, the Bench sought clarification on the specific nature of the allegations against the appellant. In response, the defence submitted that the prosecution case attributes to him the act of supporting stone pelters and maintaining contact with businessman Zahoor Ahmad Watali, who is an accused in connected proceedings.

The defence also placed reliance on Sheikh’s public profile, submitting that he has been elected twice as an independent Member of Parliament from Baramulla.

It was argued that his political position and public standing further mitigate any apprehension of his absconding or interfering with the course of justice.

Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for the NIA, sought time to respond to the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant. The Court granted the request and adjourned the matter to the next date of hearing.

In the proceedings relating to his custody parole to attend Parliament, the Delhi High Court reserved orders on Engineer Rashid’s challenge to the Rs. 4 lakh cost imposed towards travel and security arrangements after questioning the basis of the amount calculated by the Delhi Police.

Earlier, the Court had taken up his plea against the imposition of such expenses and had listed the matter for hearing while also seeking the NIA’s response to his challenge to the trial court’s order framing charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

The High Court had previously issued notice on his regular bail plea in the terror-funding case, and before that had granted him custody parole to attend the Parliament session after he moved the Court seeking bail.

The Court is expected to examine the rival submissions, the stage of the trial and the nature of the allegations while considering the plea for regular bail.

The matter will be taken up for further hearing on March 11.

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Sheikh v. National Investigation Agency

Bench: Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain

Date of Hearing: February 19, 2026