Delhi High Court Reserves Order On Plea Of Engineer Rashid To Attend Parliament In Custody

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday reserved its decision on a plea filed by Baramulla MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh, popularly known as Engineer Rashid, seeking permission to attend the ongoing Parliament session while remaining in custody.

A division bench comprising Justices Chandra Dhari Singh and Anup Jairam Bhambhani reserved the order after listening to arguments from both Engineer Rashid’s legal team and the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

“We will pass an order,” the bench stated during the hearing.

Senior advocate N Hariharan and advocate Vikhyat Oberoi, representing Rashid, requested custody parole to allow the MP to be present in Parliament.

The counsel argued, “Earlier, I (Engineer Rashid) granted custody parole by the single judge bench.”

However, the NIA strongly objected to the plea, citing serious charges pending against Rashid.

The agency questioned what might happen if he made a speech in Parliament, arguing that court-imposed conditions would not apply once he was inside.

Rashid’s counsel countered that he had allowed to campaign for elections and had taken the oath as an MP, even while under investigation.

“My (Engineer Rashid) allegiance to this country is beyond any doubt. I was granted interim bail for the campaign, not opposed,” the counsel noted.

The NIA responded by highlighting alleged jail rule violations, including Rashid’s access to a mobile phone.

“If he enters Parliament, he’s no longer in custody. He could use any phone and contact anyone,” the agency argued.

ASG Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakare added, “No fundamental right to attend the parliament. The plea should rejected on merit.”

Justice Bhambhani remarked, “He (Petitioner) was allowed to attend the parliament. People in custody are allowed to attend weddings and perform the cremation ceremony.”

The NIA stated that humanitarian grounds justify such allowances but not for those facing serious national security allegations.

Rashid Offers Supervised Attendance

Rashid’s counsel insisted he wasn’t asking for release or interim bail.

“Keep me in custody, just let me attend Parliament,” they argued, suggesting that the Speaker could supervise his movement.

The bench questioned if it had the authority to direct the Speaker, to which Rashid’s lawyer replied, “Yes, my lord, you did this.”

The NIA reiterated its stance, alleging that Rashid raised funds for terrorist activities and argued against allowing him to attend Parliament.

Justice Bhambhani responded, “You are asking us to ignore the fact that he is an elected representative. There is a provision for going out of jail in custody. What is the conflict, where is it?”

“Please don’t undermine the power of the speaker and Lok Sabha secretariat to control,” he further added.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh pointed out that Section 43D of the UAPA might be the reason Rashid’s legal team wasn’t pressing for bail.

The bench also inquired if plainclothes security personnel could accompany Rashid to Parliament.

The ASG replied that special permission from the Lok Sabha Secretariat would be necessary for such an arrangement.

Earlier this month, a special NIA court rejected Rashid’s request for custody parole on 10 March and dismissed his regular bail plea on 21 March.

Also Read: Supreme Court Slams Large-Scale Tree Cutting In MC Mehta Case