The Delhi High Court has issued a notice to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in response to a petition filed by Abdul Rashid Sheikh, popularly known as Engineer Rashid, who is a Member of Parliament representing Baramulla. Rashid has challenged the trial court’s decision to frame charges against him in a terror funding case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani took cognisance of the matter and directed that the trial court record be presented for review. The case has been scheduled for further hearing on October 6.
The charges in question were framed against Rashid in March 2022 by a trial court in a case stemming from a 2017 terror funding probe. He was arrested by the NIA in 2019 and has been in judicial custody since then. The agency alleged that he had received funds from Pakistan-based handlers to support terrorist activities and was associated with a larger conspiracy involving other separatist leaders. Rashid was formally chargesheeted in October 2019 under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the UAPA, including conspiracy and sedition.
The Delhi High Court had earlier received another application from Rashid concerning the cost imposed on him for being allowed custody parole to attend Parliament. Rashid, who was elected as an MP in 2024, had sought permission to attend the Lok Sabha sessions. The trial court had granted custody parole but directed him to pay ₹4 lakh towards expenses incurred by the Delhi Police for facilitating his transportation and security. Rashid’s legal team had submitted that this cost was unduly burdensome and sought judicial relief from the financial imposition.
In the current petition, Rashid is seeking to challenge not only the framing of charges but also related procedural issues surrounding his participation in parliamentary proceedings. His counsel argued that the trial court had erred in framing charges without sufficient evidence and that his prolonged incarceration without bail was infringing upon his rights as an elected representative. The High Court bench observed that given the overlap of issues in his multiple petitions, they should be heard together by the same bench for consistency in adjudication.
The Court has now asked the NIA to file a comprehensive response addressing the merits of the petition. It also directed the production of relevant records from the lower court to facilitate proper adjudication. The case will continue before the roster bench, and all related matters, including the delay in filing the current petition and the cost dispute, will be considered in the next hearing.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.