Read Time: 07 minutes
Engineer Rashid approached the court seeking interim bail or custody parole to allow him to join the parliament budget session. It was argued that Rashid’s constituency cannot be left unrepresented and therefore he should be allowed to join the session. In the previous hearing, Rashid contended that he was asked by the President to convene a session in prison.
The Delhi High Court, on Thursday, opined that Engineer Rashid could be allowed to join the parliament budget session while on custody parole. The bench of Justice Vikas Mahajan observed, “He (Rashid) could be allowed to attend the session in custody parole”.
The court further instructed Special Public Prosecutor Akshai Malik to seek instructions from NIA if Rashid is allowed to join the budget session on custody parole.
During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Hariharan representing Rashid apprised the court of the current status of the application and referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling on the designation of Member of Parliament (MP) and Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) courts.
The court acknowledged that a notice had been issued to the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court, and Advocate Kanhiya Singal appeared to provide further clarification. Advocate Singal informed the court that an application seeking clarification had been filed before the Supreme Court and was likely to be mentioned the following day. He further stated that the matter might be listed for hearing on either February 10 or 11, 2025. Consequently, he requested the court to take up the matter after the Supreme Court’s hearing.
Addressing the NIA, the court inquired about any objections regarding Rashid’s participation in the session while remaining in judicial custody. The court expressed the view that he could attend the session in the meantime. It also remarked that the jurisdictional issue would likely be resolved before the commencement of the next parliamentary session. In response, the court directed the NIA to seek necessary instructions on the matter.
SPP Akshai Malik informed the court that security concerns had been raised by the NIA officers. In light of these concerns, the court instructed the NIA to return the following day with appropriate instructions. However, the advocate for the NIA requested to be heard on the following Monday. Countering this request, Senior Advocate Hariharan contended that the session would likely conclude by February 13, 2025, and any delay would render the plea ineffective.
SPP Akshai Malik requested additional time to obtain further instructions on the matter. Consequently, the court scheduled the next hearing for February 7, 2025.
Background:
Engineer Rashid won the Baramulla parliamentary seat in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. However, he had been in judicial custody at Tihar Jail since 2019 following his arrest by the NIA under the UAPA Act in connection with a 2017 terror-funding case.
Rashid was involved after allegations surfaced during the investigation of Kashmiri businessman Zahoor Watali, who was accused of financing terrorist organizations and separatist activities in Kashmir.
Subsequently, the ED filed a money laundering case based on the NIA’s FIR, which accused Rashid and others of conspiring to wage war against the government and inciting unrest in Kashmir. The cases filed by the NIA and the ED also involved Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba chief and 26/11 Mumbai attack mastermind Hafiz Saeed, Hizbul Mujahideen leader Syed Salahuddin, and others.
For Petitioner: Senior Advocate N. Hariharan with Advocates Aditya Wadhwa, Vikhyat Oberoi, Nishita Gupta, Shivam Prakash, Ravi Sharma, Jagriti Pandey, Punya Rekha Angara, Vasundhara N., Sana Singh, Aman Akhtar, Vinayak Gautam and Hasnain KhwajaFor Respondent: Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, Special Public Prosecutor Akshai Malik with Advocates Ayush Aggarwal, K. Saleem, K.P. Rustom Khan and Yatharth SharmaCase Title: Abdul Rashid Sheikh v NIA
Please Login or Register
