Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim was released on parole from Rohtak jail on Tuesday. He walked out of jail after a local court granted him a furlough for three weeks on Monday. Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh is currently serving a 20-year prison term for the rape of two disciples.
The 56-year-old is incarcerated in Sunaria jail in Haryana's Rohtak district. During this temporary release spanning 21 days, Singh is scheduled to visit the Dera Sacha Sauda Ashram in Barnawa, located in Uttar Pradesh's Baghpat.
The application for temporary release was submitted by the sect's chief, who had previously obtained a 30-day parole on July 30. Before that, he had secured a 40-day parole in January. In October of the preceding year, Singh was granted another 40-day parole, and before that, he had been released on a month-long parole in June. Additionally, a three-week furlough was granted starting from February 7, 2022.
In 2021, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, along with four others, faced conviction for conspiring to murder Ranjit Singh, a Dera manager. Furthermore, the Dera chief and three others had previously been convicted in 2019 for the murder of a journalist that occurred more than 16 years ago.
Earlier this month, the Punjab and Haryana High Court quashed an FIR filed against Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh pertaining to alleged controversial remarks about Sant Kabir Das and Guru Ravidas. The accusation involved outraging religious sentiments during one of his discourses, according to news agency ANI.
Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul issued the orders in response to a plea submitted by Singh, who sought the quashing of the FIR dated March 17, registered at Patara police station, Jalandhar (Rural), under section 295A (hurting religious sentiments) of the IPC. According to news website The Indian Express, Justice Kaul stated, "Upon careful scrutiny, this Court finds no evidence of any distortion or misrepresentation in the incident relating to the life of Sant Kabir Das. The narrative does not seem to insult the religious sentiments or beliefs of any specific group, as it is deeply rooted in historical resources."
The court further said, "No evidence of malice or deliberate intent to harm any individual or community while delivering the discourse is discernible. On the contrary, the discourse of the petitioner, as already observed earlier, aligns with the various historical texts annexed with the petition. The only key distinction, if any, is that the petitioner has used local colloquial terms while delivering the discourse. However, this in no way would imply any disrespect, malice, or intentional affront to the followers of Sant Kabir Das and Guru Ravidas."
The high court pointed out that neither the State nor the complainant has contested the contents of the historical texts annexed with the petition. "Since the narrative is not a product of the petitioner’s imagination and does not contain any exaggerated elements, it cannot be said to have been delivered with any malicious intent," Justice Kaul was quoted as saying by IE.