Delhi HC seeks NIA stand on letting Engineer Rashid attend Parliament

The Delhi High Court on Thursday sought the stand of the NIA on letting jailed MP Engineer Rashid, facing trial in a terror funding case, to attend the ongoing Parliament session on custody parole.

“He can, in the meantime, attend the session in judicial custody. He is an elected MP. What is the difficulty in sending him in custody?” asked Justice Vikas Mahajan.

The court granted time till Friday to the National Investigation Agency’s (NIA) counsel to seek instructions on the issue.

Also read: Two held with gold coins worth Rs 7.8 cr at Delhi airport

The NIA counsel said the matter was “not that simple” as there was an issue of security as well.

The court was hearing Rashid’s petition alleging that he had been left without any remedy after the NIA court dealing with his bail application left him in a limbo after his election to the Lok Sabha last year on account of it not being a special MP/MLA court.

During the hearing, the counsel appearing for the high court administration said an application has been filed in the Supreme Court for a clarification and it will be mentioned on Friday for listing.

According to the top court’s website, the matter is likely to come up for hearing on February 10 or 11, he added.

Earlier, the NIA opposed Rashid’s plea seeking interim bail to attend the ongoing Parliament session and said he had no such “right” as a parliamentarian.

In his petition, Rashid has urged the high court to either direct the expeditious disposal of his pending bail plea by the NIA court or decide the matter itself.

Also read: Delhi polls: Exit polls give BJP edge over AAP, no gain for Congress

On December 24 last year, Additional Sessions Judge Chander Jit Singh, who requested the district judge to transfer the case to a court designated to try lawmakers, dismissed his plea asking for an order on the pending bail application in the NIA case.

With the matter sent back to him by the district judge, the trial judge said in his decision that he could only decide the miscellaneous application and not the bail plea.