Punjab & Haryana High Court Suspends Sentence Of Godman Rampal; Prohibits Him From Promoting 'Mob Mentality'

The Applicant/appellant Rampal approached the High Court seeking suspension of the sentence of imprisonment as imposed upon him vide an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge for having committed offences punishable under Sections 343, 302 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The case revolved around the death of disciples who were allegedly kept captive by the applicant.

The Division Bench of Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill and Justice Deepinder Singh Nalwa held, “The applicant is however, directed not to promote any kind of “mob mentality” and to avoid participating in congregations where there is any kind of tendency amongst “disciples” or participants to cause breach in peace, law and order.”

“Needless to mention that in case of violation of condition of bail or in case applicant is found to be indulging in activities having trappings of inciting others to commit any offence, it shall be open to State to take steps for cancellation of bail”, it further added.

Senior Advocate Vinod Ghai represented the Appellant while Addl. Advocate General Deepak Bhardwaj represented the Respondent.

Arguments

It was the applicant’s case that he was falsely implicated, and the case was of natural death. It was further submitted that the deaths occurred when the police lobbed tear gas shells at the ‘dera’ of the applicant, where a large number of disciples were present, on account of which conditions of suffocation developed, leading to a stampede resulting in several persons falling down and ultimately losing their lives.

On the contrary, it was the case of the Respondent-State that the applicant/appellant was virtually trying to keep the women and others as hostages and confined them in a room, wherein a condition of suffocation developed, which ultimately led to their deaths.

Reasoning

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Bench found that there were specific allegations against the applicant/appellant to the effect that he had kept the women & others captive. However, the Bench made it clear that there were some debatable issues, particularly regarding whether the cause of death was homicidal or not. The Bench further noticed that the eye-witnesses, who are relatives of the deceased, had not supported the case of the prosecution and they had rather stated that conditions of suffocation were created due to tear gas shells.

The Bench took note of the fact that the applicant is aged about 74 years and has undergone a substantial period of sentence, i.e. 10 years, 8 months & 21 days. Thus, finding it to be a fit case for suspending the sentence of the applicant/appellant during the pendency of the main appeal, the Bench allowed the application.

The Bench directed, “...it is ordered that the remaining sentence of imprisonment of the applicant/appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal, subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.”

Cause Title: Rampal Vs. State of Haryana (Case No.: CRM-30769-2024)

Appearance

Appellant: Senior Advocate Vinod Ghai, Advocates Arjun Sheoran, Arnav Ghai, Rohan Gupta, Pranhita Singh, Tejasvi Seeokand, Kashish Sahni, Chand Rathi

Respondent: Addl. Advocate General Deepak Bhardwaj, Deputy Advocate General Sheenu Sura

Click here to read/download Order