Back
Supreme Court to Hear Plea Challenging Gurmeet Ram Rahim's in 2002 Journalist
The has agreed to consider a plea challenging the 's of Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh in the 2002 of journalist Ram Chander Chhatrapati. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V Mohana on Monday listed the petition filed by the slain journalist's son, Aridaman, for final hearing in the week commencing . The Court observed that the matter "requires consideration," explicitly noting the surrounding the High Court's reversal of the 's .
Background: The and the Investigations
Ram Chander Chhatrapati, editor of the evening daily Poora Sach , was shot outside his residence in Sirsa, Haryana, on . He succumbed to his injuries on , at Apollo Hospital in Delhi. The attack allegedly stemmed from his publication of reports accusing Ram Rahim of sexually exploiting women followers at the Dera headquarters in Sirsa. An FIR was initially registered under , along with provisions of the , at . After Chhatrapati's death, the charges were upgraded to under and under .
Following petitions alleging a flawed investigation by the , the probe was transferred to the (CBI) in . In , a in Panchkula convicted Ram Rahim, along with Kuldeep Singh, Nirmal Singh, and Krishan Lal, the Dera manager, sentencing all four to . The trial court held that they had conspired to the journalist.
The High Court's Reversal and the Basis of the Challenge
On , a Division Bench of the acquitted Ram Rahim while upholding the convictions and life sentences of the other three accused. The High Court reasoned that the sole prosecution witness, Khatta Singh, had been "pressured" by the CBI to implicate Ram Rahim, rendering his testimony unreliable. This reversal is now the subject of the before the Supreme Court.
Arguing for the petitioner, , along with , contended that the High Court's appreciation of the testimony of prosecution witness No. 31 (Khatta Singh) was flawed and overlooked critical evidence that had led to the . The plea seeks to restore the Special Court's judgment.
During the hearing, , appearing for Ram Rahim, pointed out that the State had not preferred any against the High Court's order. The CJI responded that the Court was "equally conscious" of this fact, but emphasized that the case presented unusual circumstances warranting examination. Justice Bagchi noted that this was not an ordinary —it was a , which is a rare occurrence in criminal jurisprudence.
The Supreme Court's Observations
The bench made a significant oral observation that it would consider the attending the High Court's appreciation of the testimony of prosecution witness No. 31. This suggests that the Supreme Court is concerned not merely with the correctness of the outcome but with the manner in which the High Court assessed the evidence, particularly the alleged coercion of a key witness.
The Court's decision to list the matter for final hearing indicates that it perceives a substantial legal question—perhaps concerning the in appeals or the when investigative agencies are accused of . The phrase "requires consideration" implies that the High Court's reasoning may have raised issues that merit deeper judicial scrutiny.
Context: Ram Rahim's Broader Legal Entanglements
This case is one of several criminal proceedings against the 58-year-old Dera chief. He is currently lodged in Rohtak's Sunaria Jail, serving a 20-year sentence imposed in 2017 for raping two disciples. In May 2024, the had
