Delhi High Court Reserves Order on MP Rashid Engineer's Custody Parole Plea

The Delhi High Court has reserved its decision on MP Engineer Rashid's request for custody parole to attend parliament, amidst opposition from the NIA. Rashid is currently jailed under terror charges. A jurisdictional clash over his bail plea is pending further clarification from the Supreme Court of India.

The Delhi High Court has reserved its ruling on an application filed by Baramulla MP Engineer Rashid for custody parole to attend the ongoing session of parliament. The plea has faced opposition from the National Investigation Agency (NIA), which argues that Rashid does not require parole as he has no speeches or urgent matters that necessitate his presence. NIA claims the parole request is generic and unwarranted, further emphasizing logistical concerns about escorting Rashid with armed personnel, which is restricted within parliament's premises.

Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, representing NIA, contended that the authority to grant parole is limited, especially when unrelated third-party norms are involved. Senior Advocate N Hariharan, representing Rashid, stressed the reduced financial allocation to Jammu & Kashmir and Rashid's need to raise pertinent regional issues in parliament. Two days remain in the first half of the session, heightening the plea's urgency. Pending review, Justice Vikas Mahajan's bench has put Rashid's petition for custody parole on hold, scheduling the main hearing for February 11.

Rashid, currently imprisoned under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, seeks regular bail after the Special NIA Court declined jurisdiction, indicating the matter belonged to the MP/MLA court. With previous sessions seeing no interim bail granted, Rashid's constituency stands unrepresented. His counsel argues that the pending jurisdictional issue has hindered Rashid's defense. The Delhi High Court acknowledges that the Registrar General has approached the Supreme Court for resolving this jurisdictional dispute. Meanwhile, NIA maintains that Rashid's parole request does not demonstrate an urgent need, characterizing it as an abuse of the interim bail system.