Engineer Rashid informs the Delhi High Court that he is unable to attend Parliament sessions and represent his constituency due to the court’s Rs 4 lakh travel expense condition.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday heard submissions on behalf of Baramulla MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh, popularly known as Engineer Rashid, regarding his plea to modify an earlier order requiring him to bear travel expenses while attending Parliament in custody.
ALSO READ: Jailed J&K MP Engineer Rashid Gets Court Nod to Attend Parliament: July 24–August 4
Background of the Case
Engineer Rashid, an independent MP from Baramulla who defeated former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, is currently lodged in Tihar Jail in connection with an alleged terror funding case. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) arrested him in 2019 based on allegations that he provided financial support to separatists and terror groups in Jammu and Kashmir.
The case originated from an FIR filed in 2017 after his name surfaced during the interrogation of businessman Zahoor Watali.
Despite being in custody, Rashid has been allowed parole to attend parliamentary sessions. However, the order passed on March 25, 2025, imposed a condition requiring him to deposit Rs 4 lakh as travel and security expenses.
ALSO READ: Delhi HC Demands NIA Response on MP Engineer Rashid’s Bail in UAPA Terror Case
Submissions by Engineer Rashid’s Counsel
Senior Advocate N. Hariharan, representing Rashid, assisted by Advocate Vikhyat Oberoi, argued that the cost condition is unreasonable and prevents Rashid from performing his constitutional duty as an elected representative. Hariharan stressed:
“If the condition imposed is such that he is unable to go (to Parliament), we are interfering with the basic elements of democracy in this country.”
He further pointed out that Rashid had earlier been allowed to attend Parliament without any such cost being imposed and that these conditions now appear to silence the voice of his constituency.
Importantly, the senior counsel clarified that Rashid is not seeking a review of the order but only a modification of the condition regarding the expenses.
“The order is that he be taken into custody subject to conditions. I am saying the condition is erroneous and defeats the purpose of the order itself,”
he submitted.
Bench’s Observations
The division bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani noted that ordinarily, whenever custody parole is granted, the expenses are borne by the person seeking relief. They also referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in the Tahir Hussain case, which guided their consideration of costs in such situations.
However, the court raised a procedural question, asking:
“Tell us whether it is maintainable for modification or in review? Can we hear, or should you go before a bigger bench?”
The bench listed the matter for further hearing on August 12, 2025.
Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for the NIA, submitted that the order in question was a consent order, implying that Rashid had agreed to the conditions when the order was passed. He also emphasized that the state had computed the expenses based on security considerations.
Click Here to Read More Reports On National Investigation Agency (NIA)
