The Punjab & Haryana High Court today observed that in case any application for temporary release is filed by the Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim then the same shall be decided by the competent authority as per the provisions of the the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 without any favouritism or arbitrariness.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Anil Kshetarpal said, “this Court would like to observe that in case of any application is made by respondent No.9 (Ram Rahim) for temporary release, the same shall be considered strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 2022 without the competent authority indulging in arbitrariness or favoritism or discrimination.”
The Court further added that, it “would also not like to comment upon the possibility of any breach in law & order/public orders on temporary release of respondent No.9 in the future since any such attempt would lead to venturing the arena of assumptions & presumptions.”
Background
These observations were made while hearing the plea filed by Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Samiti (SGPS), a statutory body constituted under the Sikh Gurudwaras Act, 1925.
The plea alleged that the Haryana Government while granting temporary release to Ram Rahim, was misusing its powers under Section 11 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 (the Act).
It was contended that Ram Rahim, who is suffering multiple sentences including that of life for committing grave offences such as murder and rape if released, would jeopardize the sovereignty and integrity of India and adversely affect public order.
The SGPS argued that Ram Rahim was a hardcore criminal and yet the Haryana Government merely to favour him had granted temporary release by way of parole in 2023 for 40 days subject to certain conditions contained therein.
Another ground raised by the senior counsel for the petitioner was that for the grant of parole to Ram Rahim, the Act of 2022 is inapplicable. Instead, it was contended that the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (the Act of 1988) should have been applied while considering and granting parole to him.
Court’s Observations
After hearing the submissions and examining the records, the Court considered the question, “The first and the foremost question which falls for consideration before this Court is as to which among the two Acts (Act of 2022 or the Act of 1988) should have been invoked for considering the prayer made by respondent No.9 (Ram Rahim) for temporary release and passing the impugned order.”
The Court noted that the Act of 1988 stood repealed by the Act of 2022 vide Haryana Government Gazette Notification dated 11.04.2022. Section 14 of the Act of 2022 is the repealing Section.
Rejecting the petitioner’s argument, the bench reasoned that, “The object of the Act of 2022 is to temporarily release the prisoners for good conduct by way of furlough/parole. The procedure for consideration of the application for release of prisoners on parole/furlough is provided in Sections 3 and 4 of the Act of 2022 which is subject to conditions and procedure stipulated in Section 11 & 12. The competent authority in case of respondent No.9 is the Divisional Commissioner of Police as per notification dated 15.06.2022 issued by the Jail Department of Government of Haryana issued in exercise of the powers under Section 2(1)(a) of the Act of 2022.”
The Court highlighted that the applicability of the Act of 2022 as mentioned in Section 1(3) is confined to convicted prisoners who are confined by the orders of the Court having jurisdiction in Haryana and Ram Rahim “no doubt was convicted by the Courts situated within the State of Haryana.”
“The object of the Act of 2022 is to grant temporary release to the prisoners for good conduct with certain conditions. It is obvious that the Act of 2022 would apply to all such applications made by the prisoners seeking parole/furlough on or after 11.04.2022 when the Act of 2022 came into operation. Pertinently the applicability of the Act of 2022 cannot be relatable to any incident e.g. offence or conviction, which took place prior to the filing of an application under Section 3/4 of the Act of 2022,” the Court explained.
Hence, it concluded that the Act of 2022 would be applicable to an application filed by Ram Rahim.
It is crystal clear that the Act of 2022 has rightly been applied by the State of Haryana while considering and deciding the application of parole filed by Ram Rahim, the Court opined.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court further noted that another factor “which stares at the face of this Court” was whether it should dwell upon the merits of the matter when the period of parole of 40 days granted to Ram Rahim was over in March 2023.
Adding that it refrains “from considering the justifiability of temporary releases” granted by the Haryana Government, the bench said, “the cause of challenge to Annexure P-1 (parole) has become infructuous due to the expiry of period of parole granted.”
Consequently, the Punjab & Haryana High Court disposed of the plea with the hope that the “competent authority under the Act of 2022 will pass appropriate orders, within the four corners of the Act of 2022.”
Title: Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee v. State of Haryana and others
