The Crossbill News Desk
The Delhi High Court on Thursday (February 6) sought a response from the National Investigation Agency (NIA) on whether Lok Sabha MP from Jammu and Kashmir’s Baramulla, Abdul Rashid Sheikh, also known as Engineer Rashid, can be granted custody parole to attend the ongoing Parliament session, which is scheduled until February 13.
The court was hearing Rashid’s plea seeking interim relief in the form of custody parole, arguing that his absence in Parliament would leave his constituency unrepresented.
Currently lodged in Tihar Jail in connection with a 2017 terror funding case, Rashid contended that as an elected representative, he should be allowed to participate in parliamentary proceedings.
According to The Indian Express, Justice Vikas Mahajan directed the NIA counsel to provide instructions on Friday regarding the feasibility of granting custody parole for Rashid’s attendance in Parliament. However, the NIA opposed the request, citing security concerns and stating that “he cannot be taken inside Parliament.”
Justice Mahajan, however, noted that Rashid had previously been taken to Parliament for his oath-taking as an MP despite being in judicial custody.
Rashid was arrested in 2019 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The NIA alleges that he used public platforms to promote separatist and secessionist ideologies, had close ties with terrorist organizations, and sought to legitimize the United Jihad Council, a coalition of anti-India militant groups in Jammu and Kashmir.
Meanwhile, the High Court was also informed that the Delhi HC, through its registrar general, had approached the Supreme Court for clarification on whether a specially designated NIA court could also function as an MP/MLA court.
The issue arose from a 2016 Supreme Court judgment, which mandates that MP/MLA courts handle cases involving lawmakers exclusively.
Delhi HC’s counsel, Kanhaiya Singhal, informed Justice Mahajan that their application is expected to be listed before the Supreme Court on February 10 or 11, with the matter being mentioned for consideration this Friday.
Rashid’s bail plea remains pending in the trial court, as it awaits clarity on whether an NIA court has the jurisdiction to hear his case or if it must be transferred to a designated MP/MLA court.
The court was hearing Rashid’s plea seeking interim relief in the form of custody parole, arguing that his absence in Parliament would leave his constituency unrepresented.
Currently lodged in Tihar Jail in connection with a 2017 terror funding case, Rashid contended that as an elected representative, he should be allowed to participate in parliamentary proceedings.
According to The Indian Express, Justice Vikas Mahajan directed the NIA counsel to provide instructions on Friday regarding the feasibility of granting custody parole for Rashid’s attendance in Parliament. However, the NIA opposed the request, citing security concerns and stating that “he cannot be taken inside Parliament.”
Justice Mahajan, however, noted that Rashid had previously been taken to Parliament for his oath-taking as an MP despite being in judicial custody.
Rashid was arrested in 2019 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The NIA alleges that he used public platforms to promote separatist and secessionist ideologies, had close ties with terrorist organizations, and sought to legitimize the United Jihad Council, a coalition of anti-India militant groups in Jammu and Kashmir.
Meanwhile, the High Court was also informed that the Delhi HC, through its registrar general, had approached the Supreme Court for clarification on whether a specially designated NIA court could also function as an MP/MLA court.
The issue arose from a 2016 Supreme Court judgment, which mandates that MP/MLA courts handle cases involving lawmakers exclusively.
Delhi HC’s counsel, Kanhaiya Singhal, informed Justice Mahajan that their application is expected to be listed before the Supreme Court on February 10 or 11, with the matter being mentioned for consideration this Friday.
Rashid’s bail plea remains pending in the trial court, as it awaits clarity on whether an NIA court has the jurisdiction to hear his case or if it must be transferred to a designated MP/MLA court.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment