NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court registrar general has written to the Supreme Court over the issue of jurisdiction of the court which should ideally hear jailed J&K MP Rashid Engineer’s bail plea in a NIA case.Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, representing the NIA, informed Justice Vikas Mahajan that the senior high court official sought the Supreme Court’s indulgence over the issue of jurisdiction.The issue arose after a NIA court said it couldn’t hear the bail plea of the jailed MP, facing terror charges, as it lacked jurisdiction.On the other hand, the statute doesn’t allow courts designated to try MPs and MLAs to hear cases probed by the National Investigation Agency.Justice Mahajan issued notice to its registrar general on the issue after Rashid said he was left without any remedy after the NIA court dealing with his bail application “left him in a limbo” post his election to the Lok Sabha last year saying it wasn’t a special MP/MLA court.Luthra opposed Rashid’s plea for interim bail to attend the ongoing Parliament session, arguing he had no such “right” as a parliamentarian.The court was informed that in November last year, the agency made a representation to the registrar general on the issue of designation of the NIA court as a court which could hear MP/MLA cases.”It is deemed appropriate to issue notice to the registrar general of the court to ascertain the status as regard the administrative order and clarification on the issue. Issue notice,” said Justice Mahajan.The matter would be heard on February 6.In the alternative, Rashid sought custody parole during the budget session of the Parliament, which began on January 31 and concludes on April 4.Rashid was elected from the Baramulla constituency in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections and has been lodged in Tihar Jail since 2019 after the NIA arrested him under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in the 2017 terror-funding case.When Luthra opposed grant of regular bail to Rashid, senior advocate N Hairharan, representing the MP, said at the current stage he only sought interim bail to attend the parliamentary proceedings and the main bail plea could be taken up later.
Source link
