New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Friday said it will hold a preliminary hearing in January on the plea filed by jailed Jammu and Kashmir MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh, who has challenged the costs imposed on him for attending Parliament while in custody.
The matter reached Justice Ravinder Dudeja after a division bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Anup Jairam Bhambhani delivered a split verdict on Rashid’s request to modify an order directing him to deposit about ₹4 lakh with prison authorities for attending Parliament sessions.
Justice Dudeja has scheduled the preliminary hearing for January 14, following submissions from Rashid’s counsel and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) that the judge must decide whether to pronounce the verdict himself or refer the appeal to a larger bench.
Under Section 433 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), when judges on a bench are equally divided, the matter is referred to another judge. The proviso allows for a rehearing by a larger bench if the concerned judges deem it necessary.
On November 7, the division bench delivered differing opinions: one judge held that Rashid had no right or privilege to attend Parliament while in custody, while the other said he was liable only for reasonable transportation costs—not for the expenses of the police escort.
Justice Chaudhary, the senior judge, dismissed Rashid’s request to modify the earlier order directing the payment of approximately ₹4 lakh. Justice Bhambhani, however, allowed the plea, prompting both judges to issue separate judgments and refer the case to the chief justice.
Rashid, the Baramulla MP who defeated Omar Abdullah in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, is facing trial in a terror-funding case alleging support to separatist and terror groups in Jammu and Kashmir. He has been lodged in Tihar Jail since 2019 following his arrest by the NIA.
Earlier, a Delhi court had permitted him to attend the Monsoon Session of Parliament from July 24 to August 4 under police escort.
Justice Chaudhary held that attending parliamentary sittings is not an emergent situation comparable to death, marriage, or serious illness. In contrast, Justice Bhambhani stressed that an elected MP has a constitutional duty to represent his constituents, noting that the President summons MPs to attend Parliament.
Justice Bhambhani ruled that Rashid could only be asked to pay for transportation between prison and Parliament, rejecting the State’s demand that he cover the cost of accompanying police officers. The State had calculated the per-day cost of custody-parole arrangements at ₹1.45 lakh, prompting Rashid to seek a waiver.
According to the State’s cost breakdown, Justice Bhambhani clarified that Rashid’s liability should be limited to the jail van and escort vehicle expenses—₹1,036 and ₹1,020 per day, respectively.
Rashid was charge-sheeted in October 2019, and a special NIA court framed charges against him in March 2022 under IPC Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 121 (waging war against the government), 124A (sedition), as well as provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act related to terror funding and terrorist activities.
