The Delhi High Court has issued a notice to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in response to a plea filed by Baramulla MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh.
He has requested permission to attend the ongoing Parliament session. The court has also directed the NIA to file an affidavit if it objects to the plea.
Previous Plea Rejected
Sheikh’s earlier request for custodial parole was denied by a special NIA court. Now, a division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta has sought the NIA’s response. The matter is scheduled for a hearing on March 18.
Legal Arguments
Senior advocate N. Hariharan, representing Abdul Rashid Sheikh (also known as Engineer Rashid), argued that the MP should be allowed to attend the Parliament session. He noted that Sheikh had been granted two days of custodial parole in February 2025 for the same purpose.
When the court inquired about the session’s duration, Hariharan informed them that it would continue until April 4. However, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Akshai Malik opposed the plea, stating that the previous order was given due to the absence of a designated court at that time, allowing only two days of parole.
Representation and Court Observations
Hariharan further emphasized Sheikh’s role as an elected representative, stating, “I represent 45 percent of the population of Kashmir.” The SPP requested time to file a formal reply, but the court questioned the necessity of a hearing if the session had already concluded. “We can hear it if you are ready to argue,” the bench stated.
Fresh Petition Filed
Sheikh has now approached the Delhi High Court after the trial court refused his request for custody parole. His plea, filed through advocate Vikhyat Oberoi, seeks either interim bail or interim custody parole to attend the Parliament session from March 10 to April 4, 2025.
Trial Court’s Rejection
On March 10, the Patiala House Court, under Special Judge (NIA) Chander Jit Singh, denied Sheikh’s custody parole request. He had sought permission to attend Parliament sessions for nearly a month, but the court rejected his plea.
Security Arrangements Discussed
Advocates Vikhyat Oberoi and Nishita Gupt argued that Sheikh posed no security threat. They highlighted that he had been granted custody parole previously, including three extensions, and had received interim bail for campaigning in Kashmir.
Addressing security concerns, they proposed that jail authorities could escort Sheikh to Parliament and return him afterward. They also suggested that security personnel in civilian clothing could accompany him inside.
The defense team pointed out that Sheikh had been granted custody parole for two days in February, on the 11th and 13th. “There will be no hindrance if he attends Parliament under custody parole,” his counsel argued.
With the High Court set to hear the matter on March 18, Sheikh’s legal battle to secure attendance at the ongoing Parliament session continues.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
