Delhi High Court reserves order on Baramulla MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh’s bail plea in NIA terror funding case
New Delhi, November 3, 2026: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday reserved its order on the regular bail plea of Baramulla MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh, widely known as Engineer Rashid, in a 2017 National Investigation Agency (NIA) case involving allegations of terror funding and secessionist activity in Jammu and Kashmir.
A Division Bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Vikas Mahajan reserved the verdict after hearing arguments from Senior Advocate N. Hariharan, assisted by Vikhyat Oberoi, for Sheikh, and Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, assisted by Special Public Prosecutor Akshay Malik, for the NIA.
Sheikh has been in judicial custody at Tihar Jail since his arrest by the NIA in August 2019. He faces charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including criminal conspiracy and related offences. The case, RC No. 10/2017/NIA/DLI, was registered in May 2017. While Sheikh was not named in the initial chargesheet or the first supplementary chargesheet, he was added as an accused in the second supplementary chargesheet filed in October 2019. Charges against him and others were framed in March 2022.
Seeking bail, Hariharan argued that Sheikh has spent nearly seven years in custody. He also pointed to the case of co-accused Shabir Ahmad Shah, who faces similar allegations in the same matter and was granted bail by the Supreme Court in March 2026 on the grounds of prolonged incarceration and trial delays. The court has previously taken note of the large number of witnesses — around 240 — and observed that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude.
Opposing the plea, Luthra alleged that Sheikh had influenced prosecution witnesses. According to the NIA, the testimony recorded so far suggested influence over three specific witnesses, and at least two protected witnesses had turned hostile. The agency further argued that Sheikh had made speeches against India, supported anti-India activities, and met witnesses during periods when he was out on interim bail. On that basis, the NIA contended that he should not be granted bail.
The defence denied the allegation of witness influence, saying the witnesses cited by the prosecution had long-standing professional ties with Sheikh, including as a driver and personal assistants. Counsel also submitted that Sheikh had spent most of the relevant period in custody and noted that, as a Member of Parliament, he has sworn allegiance to the Constitution of India.
Sheikh has earlier been allowed interim bail or custody parole on multiple occasions, including to take oath as an MP, attend Parliament sessions, campaign during elections, and deal with matters following the death of his father. In September 2026, the High Court had asked the NIA whether he could be released on bail under strict conditions, including a restriction on his stay to Delhi, and had posted the matter for further hearing on November 3.
The larger NIA case concerns allegations that funds routed through Pakistan-based networks and hawala channels were used to support separatist and terrorist activities in the Valley. Other accused in the case include Yasin Malik. The trial is still pending, and the High Court’s order on Sheikh’s bail plea is awaited.
