In the past week, ‘bail is the rule, jail is the exception’ has not been much in favour of the masses. The Indian criminal justice system has evolved to establish a robust system, at least on paper, which provides adequate safeguards to the accused while protecting the rights of victims of crime. However, of late, the intent and instance seem misplaced as perpetrators are instead benefiting from the established mechanisms.
Take the case of Kuldeep Singh Sengar, the four-time Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) formally from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), who was recently granted the ‘suspension of sentence’ by the High Court of Delhi. He was convicted by the trial court for aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a minor in 2017, tampering with the subsequent investigation, and involvement in the murder of the survivor’s family members. The order was stayed by the Supreme Court.
In the same week, Baba Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh ‘Insan’, the leader of the Dera Sacha Sauda social group, was granted his 15th parole in his life sentence for cases involving the rape of two women and conspiracy in a journalist’s murder. The son of the slain journalist has reached the apex court demanding a revocation of the parole granted to him by the state government of Haryana on the pretext that it was sanctioned by the High Court for his good conduct inside the prison. Ironically, a man whose innocence was being claimed on the basis of ‘impotence’, made a music video calling himself ‘Lovecharger’.
Also, in an interesting turn of events, India is about to witness a criminal case, which will be fought through video conferencing as the complainant is in the United States and fears returning to India. His case is a forceful castration of not only him, but nearly 400 others, on the promise of attaining ‘moksha’ by the self-styled Baba.
This, along with a series of judgments in the first week of this new year, has reignited the debate on bail, leading to many questioning the allegedly selective application of the “bail, not jail” principle. This article discusses the Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh case to outline how paisa, patriarchy and politics wield power over truth, justice and righteousness in India.
Jack of all trades, master of minds
Gurmeet Ram Rahim Sigh has been granted his 15th parole in a 20-year sentence, which began with his conviction in 2017 for having raped two of his disciples. He returns to comfort for the next fourteen days, staying at his Sirsa headquarters. In 2019, this self-styled godman was also proven guilty of having murdered a journalist sixteen years ago.
Singh was inducted into the Dera Sacha Sauda (DSS), or the “Place of Truth”, at the young age of seven. Once a non-governmental organisation in its character and now described as a “religious cult”, DSS has come far not only from its initial following base, but also its principles as Gurmeet Singh continues to lead it regardless of his conviction.
Ram Rahim Singh’s supporters riot after rape conviction. Image via AlJazeera
At just 23 years, Singh was appointed as the successor to the second chief of DSS and it expanded dramatically. His multiple ‘reforms’ are popular among the marginalised communities of Punjab and Haryana, who face extreme discrimination due to religious and caste-based marginalisation. Most talked about were media productions by the DSS under him, which included the self-produced ‘Messenger of God‘ (MSG) film series on Singh, music videos. He also has 19 entries in the Guinness Book of World Records under his belt for organising mosaics and health camps. These propagandist initiatives gathered followers from the working and middle-class Hindu community from the rural areas of North India.
His political influence and messaging asking followers to vote for certain candidates gave him political clout amidst both the then ruling coalition led by the Indian National Congress and the opposition, Bharatiya Janata Party. But even as his messages appealed to abstain from drugs and alcohol, life turned bitter for the ‘rockstar baba‘ when an anonymous letter claimed that he sexually harassed two female disciples from 1999 to 2002.
On August 25 2017, when Singh arrived in court in a 200-car cavalcade after covering a 250 km journey from Sirsa to Panchkula in Haryana, news channels ran live-coverage. He had been accorded Z-plus security, reserved for prominent politicians as the highest level of official protection.
The judgment described how the crime of rape occurred in Singh’s private shelter, or goofa when he forced himself on the survivor on the pretext of making her pavitra (pure) of her past romantic relationships. Unfortunately, this happened again, and Singh was guarded by female guards who arranged these private meetings, and her brother was murdered when he tried to expose the crime. A familiar story unfolded in the other case, where the survivor’s sister had also confessed to sexual assault by Singh, and both of them were withdrawn from the DSS by their parents. Calling Singh’s actions those of a ‘wild beast’, the Panchkula judge held that he deserved no mercy and sentenced him to 10+2 years of imprisonment each for the charge of raping two female disciples. This was to run concurrently, but the judge made it consecutively, that is, 10+10 years. His conviction saw followers take over the streets, attacking media vehicles, official buildings, torching trains, buses and railway stations; killing nearly forty people and injuring more than 200.
A special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court in Haryana soon undertook investigations into his alleged involvement in the killing of Ram Chander Chhatrapati. Chhatrapati ran a local Hindi newspaper, Poora Sach (The Whole Truth), which published the anonymous letter in 2002 and exposed instances of rape, exploitation and castration of nearly 400 followers at the DSS. This was taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court under sou motu cognisance. Chattrapati was shot outside his house, and in 2019, Singh and three others were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for his murder. Again, the judge noted the severity and nature of his offences and ruled that the punishments cannot run concurrently. Hence, in totality,y he was sentenced to 10+10 years and at least 20 years of imprisonment.
Yet, Singh’s criminal profile is unfinished. In 2021, the CBI sentenced him to life imprisonment for the murder of Ranjit Singh in 2002. He was the manager at DSS and the brother of one of the survivors. He and his associates were suspected of having circulated the anonymous letter. However, in 2024, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana acquitted him and four others of this charge, holding that the investigations were “tainted and sketchy”. Currently, the CBI has filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against this judgment.
Now another trial is due on the complaint of a former singer in Singh’s musical team, whom he called ‘Hakiki Hans’, who was denied support by the police and approached the High Court through a private petition. A 2013 medical examination hinted at the possibility of castration for his missing testicles, and along with Singh, two doctors who worked at his Dera have been charged. The case was transferred to the CBI, and the complainant relocated to the US as the other trials were underway. Justice Anil Kumar Chauhan, unconventionally, allowed his testimony by videoconferencing even though it was objected to by the defence. He went an extra mile by asking the CBI to arrange a document visualiser to allow the defence to confront him with evidence, a high-resolution screen and an uninterrupted power supply in two days from 4:30 pm to 8 pm on the 8th and 9th of January, 2026. The Indian consulate in New York is responsible for ensuring the protection of the complainant.
A part-time prisoner
Gurmeet Singh was last granted parole in August 2025 for 40 days. In the same year, he was granted a 21-day furlough in April and a 30-day parole in January, notably close to the February Delhi assembly elections. Similarly, his October 2024 parole for 20 days was granted days before the Haryana state assembly elections. Again, a three-week furlough was granted two weeks ahead of the 2022 Punjab assembly elections.
The Indian legal system follows the principles of reformative theory of punishment, wherein rehabilitation of offenders into becoming law-abiding citizens and humane treatment is adopted, rather than revenge. Parole and furlough are products of this practice and are mentioned in The Prisoners Act, 1894.
Parole is the system of releasing a prisoner with the suspension of the sentence. It is conditional and subject to the following mandated periodic reporting to the authorities for a fixed period of time. Parole is not a right granted for special reasons, such as the death or wedding of a blood relative. It may be denied even when a person qualifies for it due to good conduct if releasing the convict is not in the larger public interest.
Ram Rahim (left) granted parole for 15th time since 2017 conviction, Umar Khalid denied bail by Supreme Court. (PTI photos)
Furlough is granted in cases of long-term imprisonment and unlike parole, it is a matter of right of the prisoner. It is treated as a remission of sentence and is granted unconditionally for the convict to retain social ties to counter the possible ill-effects of long-term incarceration.
In parole, time is not counted towards the sentence, and it is granted by the Divisional Commissioner. Whereas, furlough, being a periodic right, constitutes the time spent in release and is allowed by the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Police.
In the case of Gurmeet Singh, his frequent releases are governed by the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988. Initially, it was difficult to grant him parole as it required valid reasons, but in 2022, the Haryana government amended parole laws to add that no matter how serious the crime is, a convict is entitled to up to 70 days of parole and 21 days of furlough in a year, given that they maintain good conduct and no reason otherwise is required.
The January 05, 2026, grant of 40 days’ parole is his 15th release from prison. In the past eight years, out of the minimum 40 years that he is to serve, he has spent more than 405 days out of jail.
Court’s confusing quandary
Lately, the Indian higher judiciary has been under much scrutiny, even by those within the system, for giving inconsistent orders. In 2021, social activist Father Stan Swamy died in jail at the age of 84 after being repeatedly denied bail on medical grounds despite suffering from Parkinson’s disease. In 2024, the Supreme Court cancelled the 2022 release of eleven convicts in the brutal gangrape of Bilkis Bano, a pregnant Muslim woman during the 2002 Gujarat riots. This is similar to the recent stay on Sengar’s ‘suspension of sentence’. The state government’s sanctioned release led to global outrage, and on the survivor’s petition, a division bench held that the Gujarat state government was not competent to pass a remission order as the accused were tried in a court in Maharashtra. However, this came after a shameful celebration involving garlanding after their release and two years of re-traumatisation for the survivor. In the same year, writer and human rights defender, Professor GN Saibaba, died shortly after his acquittal, post a prolonged incarceration with 90% physical disability and rejection of multiple bail pleas for medical treatment.
Professor GN Saibaba
Earlier this week, after five years of pre-trial incarceration, five accused were granted bail in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case after the Supreme Court noted their role to be “derivative”. However, Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, formerly research scholars at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, were denied bail on the grounds of their degree of involvement in the alleged criminal charges under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 2019, which was held to be “central and formative”. Though Khalid has been granted interim bail thrice to attend family engagements, substantive or regular bail has been repeatedly denied to him, and the case has gone without trial for nearly six years now. While the co-accused have now spent 1900+ days in jail for their alleged “architectural” role in causing the riots, those proven guilty are permitted bail frequently. This, even as the latter poses more immediate danger to the survivors than the former, as is evident in the case that is scheduled for hearing.
In such a perplexing scenario, it is difficult to ascertain whether justice is truly delivered at conviction. This is because, whether under permanent police supervision or self-inflicted isolation, survivors seem to be serving the sentence with their perpetrators, not lodged inside jails but caged in their own homes.
Second year student of Media Studies at CHRIST (Deemed to be University), BRC, Bangalore. A trained Kathak dancer, theatre artist and political nerd.