Supreme Court Dismisses SGPC’s Petition Against Haryana Govt Over Ram Rahim’s Parole

On Friday, the Supreme Court rejected SGPC’s petition challenging the Haryana government’s use of Section 11 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022, in granting parole and furlough to Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim.

Bench’s Observations

A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra delivered the order while considering an earlier Punjab & Haryana High Court ruling, which stated that any application for Ram Rahim’s temporary release must decided impartially, without favoritism or discrimination, under the 2022 Act.

As per Live Law, Justice Gavai stated, “Petition pertains to grant of furlough in 2023. We are in 2025. Apart from that, Mr. Rohatgi, ld. senior counsel, has raised a question with regard to even maintainability of PIL in respect of individual matter. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to consider the present petition. It is further to be noted that the High Court, in para 6 of the order itself, observed that in case any application is made by respondent No 9 for temporary release, the same shall be considered strictly in accordance with the provisions of Act of 2022 without the competent authority indulging in arbitrariness or favoritism or discrimination.”

SGPC’s Arguments

The SGPC’s counsel argued that courts grant parole only for compelling reasons.

However, despite convictions for rape and murder, Ram Rahim received parole and furlough annually between 2022 and 2024, totaling the maximum permitted period of 91 days.

The counsel cited Section 11 of the 2022 Act, noting that courts bar parole or furlough unless the convict is on bail in all pending cases.

Additionally, the lawyer highlighted a High Court order that had dismissed Ram Rahim’s bail plea as withdrawn.

When the court questioned the delay, the counsel explained that authorities granted Ram Rahim temporary release again in January 2025, even though they had issued the furlough order in 2023.

He also noted that officials had not recorded any reasons for the release in official warrants.

Defense & Court’s Response

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Ram Rahim, challenged the petition’s maintainability, calling it politically motivated.

“There are 100s of people on parole/furlough. PIL is only for him (Ram Rahim) because there is political rivalry between this petitioner (and Ram Rahim),” Rohatgi asserted.

Justice Mishra also questioned the petitioner’s selective focus.

As per Live Law, he asked, “You are against one individual. You are not praying any relief which is general and common in nature. Your relief focuses on the 9th respondent (Ram Rahim) that he is receiving special treatment. What is the public interest?”

The SGPC’s counsel responded that the High Court had examined other cases as well and noted that Ram Rahim still had four pending cases related to desecration.

Despite these arguments, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition.

Before concluding, the SGPC’s counsel noted that despite the High Court’s directive for strict compliance with the law, authorities granted Ram Rahim temporary release again in January 2025.

Justice Gavai suggested that if authorities had violated the High Court’s order, the petitioner should file a contempt plea there.

The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), a statutory body under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, had approached the High Court, arguing that the Haryana government was misusing its powers under Section 11 of the 2022 Act.

It contended that releasing Ram Rahim – who is serving multiple sentences, including life imprisonment – could pose a threat to public order and national integrity.

Also Read: Delhi High Court Reserves Judgment In Christian James Michel’s Bail Plea In AgustaWestland Case