The Delhi High Court on Thursday sought the response of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) on the interim bail plea of Baramulla MP Rashid Engineer, who has been in Tihar Jail in connection with the Jammu and Kashmir terror-funding case, to attend the Parliament’s Budget session.
The Bench of Justice Vikas Mahajan noted that the NIA counsel had submitted that they needed time to take instructions on the matter.
Engineer has sought interim bail from January 31 to April 5, aligning with the Parliament’s session schedule. The first part of the Parliament’s Budget session will begin on January 31, with the Union Budget scheduled for February 1, and will conclude on February 13. The second part of the session is set to commence on March 10 and will conclude on April 5, 2024.
The counsel for Rashid Engineer submitted that his entire constituency cannot go unrepresented for a long period, as he was not granted interim bail during the last session. He also pointed out that his regular bail application has been pending since September 2024.
However, the counsel for the NIA pointed out that the issue regarding whether the NIA court can hear cases involving MPs and MLAs is still pending. The High Court registry has approached the Supreme Court for clarification.
Recently, the Delhi High Court issued notice to the NIA on Engineer’s plea, which sought directions from the High Court to the trial court judge to expedite a decision on his pending regular bail application or to adjudicate the matter.
Engineer moved the High Court after Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Chander Jit Singh, the special judge assigned to NIA cases, declined to rule on his bail application on December 23. The judge stated that the court only had the authority to hear miscellaneous applications, not bail petitions.
Previously, the district judge returned the case to the ASJ court after a request from the ASJ to transfer the matter to a designated court for lawmakers, given Rashid Engineer’s status as an MP. This transfer request was made with the consent of both the accused and the prosecuting agency, the NIA. The district judge’s decision came after noting that the issue of court jurisdiction was still pending before the Delhi High Court. Until the High Court rules on jurisdiction, the ASJ court will continue to hear the case.
Both Rashid’s counsel and the NIA had agreed to keep the matter in the current court. In addition to the NIA’s case, the special judge had suggested moving a related money laundering case and Rashid’s regular bail application to the court designated for lawmakers.
Rashid Engineer recently surrendered at Tihar Jail after his interim bail expired. This is related to the 2017 Jammu and Kashmir terror funding case currently being investigated by the NIA. Rashid was arrested in August 2019 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). During his incarceration, he filed his nomination for the 2024 parliamentary elections from jail and won by a margin of 204,000 votes, defeating former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah.
In 2022, the NIA Court at Patiala House Court ordered the framing of charges against Rashid Engineer and several other key figures, including Hafiz Saeed, Syed Salahuddin, Yasin Malik, Shabbir Shah, Masrat Alam, Zahoor Ahmed Watali, Bitta Karate, Aftab Ahmed Shah, Avtar Ahmed Shah, Naeem Khan, and Bashir Ahmed Butt (also known as Peer Saifullah).
The charges are part of an ongoing investigation into terror funding in Jammu and Kashmir, where the National Investigation Agency (NIA) alleges that various militant organisations, such as Lashkar-e-Taiba, Hizbul Mujahideen, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and JKLF, collaborated with Pakistan’s intelligence agency, ISI, to orchestrate attacks on civilians and security forces in the region.
The NIA’s investigation claims that in 1993, the All Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC) was formed to further separatist activities, with funding channeled through hawala and other covert methods. Hafiz Saeed, along with Hurriyat leaders, is accused of using these illicit funds to fuel unrest in Jammu and Kashmir, targeting security forces, inciting violence, burning schools, and damaging public property.
The agency contends that these operations were designed to destabilise the region and promote terrorism under the guise of political resistance. (ANI)
