‘Consider all convictions while giving furlough to Ram Rahim’
CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court has said that it would be appropriate for the Haryana government to consider pros and cons of all the convictions in the case of Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim, while considering his parole and furlough in future.
The high court bench of justice Raj Mohan Singh, in the detailed judgment released on Friday, said as per the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Amendment Act, 2013, only murder conviction would fall in the category of “hardcore prisoner” and not conviction under criminal conspiracy (120-B) for murder, for which the dera chief has been convicted.
The court also took note of submissions that sentence of life imprisonment in two murder cases will start only after expiry of his sentence in rape cases, which too are 10 years each. The sentences in murder cases have not started so far, it said.
Ram Rahim is lodged in
Rohtak’s Sunaria jail following his conviction in two rape and two murder cases, all dating back to 2002.
He is in jail since August 2017, when he was first convicted for rapes of two female disciples in 2002 on Sirsa dera premises. He was granted 20 days furlough on February 7, 2022.
The judgment came in February 2022 plea of a Patiala resident, who had claimed that the furlough granted just ahead of assembly polls in Punjab, was in view of assembly elections in the state.
“He committed heinous crimes and has been convicted. He ought not to have been granted furlough,” argued.
The court also wondered as to how and in what manner, the assembly election has been prejudiced, particularly when Ram Rahim has been ordered to stay in Gurugram only and strict terms and conditions were imposed on his movements and his security was constantly under close vigil of the police administration.
The court added that the state has rightly “interpreted” provisions of law. But added that “it would be appropriate for the state to consider all pros and cons arising out of all the convictions for the purpose of further furlough/parole, if any, in accordance with law”.
The court also added that legislature has excluded Section 120-B in the definition clause of hardcore prisoner. “Even in case of some defect in the phraseology used by the legislature, the court cannot aid the legislature’s defective phrasing or add and amend or by construction make up the deficiency unless and until, challenge is laid to the vires of such enactment,” the court added, disposing of the plea.
it was