Punjab and Haryana High Court: In an application filed by self-styled Godman Rampal (‘the convict’)- seeking suspension of the sentence of life imprisonment without remission, imposed upon him for having committed offences punishable under Sections 343, 302 and 120-B of Penal Code 1860 (‘IPC’), a Division Bench of Gurvinder Singh Gill and Deepinder Singh Nalwa JJ. suspended the remainder of his sentence.
The case pertains to five murders cases arising from the deaths of his disciples during violent clashes in 2014 between his followers and the police, who had arrived to arrest him. The Court took into consideration the existence of debatable issues regarding whether the cause of death was indeed homicidal, before granting the relief. The convict contended that he had been falsely implicated and as a matter of fact it was a case of natural death as the report of board of doctors stated that the deceased had died due to asphyxia. Further, he stated that two of the eyewitnesses, who are closely related to the deceased admitted that the deceased was already suffering from the ailments for about 1 month prior to the incident. Further, he contended that the deaths occurred when the police admittedly lobbed tear gas shells at the dera of convict where many disciples were present, on account of which conditions of suffocation developed leading to a stampede resulting in several persons falling down and ultimately lost their lives.
On the other hand, the respondent opposed the bail and contended that it was a case where the deceased as well as other women had been held captive in the ashram of the convict, where they were not even given food and sufficient accommodation, it was on account of suffocation that the deceased lost her life.
After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court opined that there were specific allegations against the convict that he had kept the women and others captive, but there were certainly some debatable issues particularly regarding cause of death being homicidal or not. The Court further stated that even the eyewitnesses, who were relatives of the deceased, had not supported the case of the prosecution and had specified that conditions of suffocation were created due to tear gas shells.
Considering the age of the convict and the fact that he had undergone a substantial period of sentence, i.e., 10 years, 8 months and 21 days, the Court allowed the application and suspended his sentence subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned..
The Court directed the convict to not promote any kind of mob mentality and to avoid participating in congregations where there could be any kind of tendency amongst disciples or participants to cause breach in peace, law and order. Further, the Court held that in case of violation of condition of bail or in case the convict was found to be indulging in activities having trappings of inciting others to commit any offence, it should be open to State to take steps for cancellation of bail.
[Rampal v. State of Haryana, 2025 SCC OnLine P&H 7344, decided on 28-8-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Appellant: Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate, Arnav Ghai, Advocate, Arjun Sheoran, Advocate and Kashish Sahni, Advocate,
For the Respondent: Deepak Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G., Haryana and Munish Sharma, DAG, Haryana
