The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a plea filed by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) challenging the temporary release of Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh. The bench, comprising Justices B R Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra, ruled against hearing the challenge to the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s order regarding Singh’s release.
The SGPC’s petition was dismissed on grounds of maintainability, as noted by Singh’s legal representation, who argued that the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was unjustly targeted at Singh alone, implying a misuse of the legal system for potentially politically motivated reasons.
Singh, currently serving a 20-year sentence for the rape of two disciples, was granted temporary release under the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022. This act allows for parole or furlough under strict conditions meant to ensure fairness and lack of favoritism.
The SGPC had moved to the apex court against a High Court order from August 2024, which suggested that any application for Singh’s temporary release should be judged by the relevant authorities without any “arbitrariness or favoritism”. Despite this directive, the SGPC argued that Singh had been granted multiple paroles or furloughs to the maximum allowed duration between 2022 and 2024, which they claimed showed a pattern of preferential treatment.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court referred to the High Court’s stance that any application for Singh’s release must adhere strictly to the 2022 act, without any discrimination or bias. The court also noted that if the SGPC had issues with Singh’s parole granted in January, they should challenge it directly or file a contempt petition in the High Court for violating its order.
In a separate but related legal development, on January 3, the Supreme Court agreed to review a CBI appeal against the acquittal of Singh and four others in the 2002 murder of Ranjit Singh, a former manager of the sect. Last year, the High Court acquitted Singh and the others involved, criticizing the investigation as “tainted and sketchy.”
