Engineer Rashid’s custody parole costs: Delhi HC to decide if a single judge can decide on split verdict

Baramulla MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh alias Engineer Rashid has sought a waiver of travel and security costs for attending Parliament proceedings while on custody parole.

Written by Sohini Ghosh
New Delhi | November 14, 2025 03:12 PM IST

3 min read

With both judges differing, the matter will now go before the Chief Justice for a final decision.

The Delhi High Court delivered a split verdict on MP Engineer Rashid’s plea seeking waiver of his security and travel costs to attend Parliament. (Express Archive)

Can a single judge hear a split verdict of a Division Bench, or is it to be referred to a larger three-judge Bench? The Delhi High Court is due to consider this aspect in January, while dealing with the petition of independent Baramulla MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh alias Engineer Rashid, who is seeking waiver of travel and security costs for attending Parliament proceedings while on custody parole.

A division bench of the Delhi HC on November 7 had delivered a split verdict on Rashid’s plea, following which the matter was placed before Justice Ravinder Dudeja on Friday.

This story requires a subscription

Select a plan and use IE10 code to get 10% extra off

POPULAR

EXPRESS EDGE

Daily ePaper access

Premium stories & archives

UPSC Section + UPSC Essentials Magazine

Premium stories & archives

UPSC Section + UPSC Essentials Magazine

Starts at ₹133/month

Best for UPSC aspirants

This story requires a subscription

Please Select A Plan

POPULAR

EXPRESS EDGE

Daily ePaper access

Premium stories & archives

UPSC Section + UPSC Essentials Magazine

Premium stories & archives

UPSC Section + UPSC Essentials Magazine

Starts at ₹133/month

Best for UPSC aspirants

Taken up briefly, the counsels referred to Section 433 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), a procedure where Judges of the Court of Appeal are equally divided, which is the CrPC Section 392 equivalent, and impressed that he will have to decide if he can hear it or whether it has to be decided by a larger bench.

Justice Dudeja has now kept the matter for consideration on January 14.

Rashid’s plea was heard by a bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Anup Bhambhani. While Justice Chaudhary had held that Rashid has “no right, duty, entitlement or privilege, as it may be called, to attend the parliament proceedings while in lawful custody,” Justice Bhambhani took a divergent position.

Justice Bhambhani clearly held that the only costs payable by Rashid would be towards jail van expenses and escort vehicle expenses at Rs 1,036 and Rs 1,020 per day, respectively, and is not required to pay for the police escort.

The police had estimated a per-day cost of around Rs 1.45 lakh for Rashid to attend Parliament, to be paid by him. In March this year, the Delhi HC, while allowing the MP to attend Parliament during the Budget session, had imposed the condition that the expenses for Rashid’s travel and other arrangements shall be borne by him while he is in the state’s custody.

Story continues below this ad

Justice Bhambhani held that the “only legitimate expense that (Rashid) can be asked to bear is the cost of transportation for taking him from prison to Parliament and back; and the State’s demand that (Rashid) must foot the charges for all police officers, who are public servants, and who the state says are required to accompany (Rashid), is wholly unjustified and deserves to be quashed.”