CHANDIGARH: While exonerating Dera Sacha Sauda (DSS) chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim of conspiring in the murder of journalist Ram Chander Chhatrapati, Punjab and Haryana high court held that the crime may have been committed by some followers driven by “excessive and single-minded zeal”.According to the court, it’s not uncommon for followers to cross legal boundaries in the name of faith.“The trial court should have closely examined whether there was overwhelming evidence directly implicating the Dera chief, or whether the crime could have been carried out independently by some of his staunch followers,” the bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Vikram Aggarwal observed in their March 7 order, which was uploaded on Monday.HC criticised the CBI investigation, recording that it appears that a key witness — the preacher’s former driver Khatta Singh — was coerced by the central agency into making a statement as CBI was under pressure to conclude the investigation. “It is a matter of grave concern that a premier investigating agency adopted this kind of methodology with a view to succeeding in the matter,” observed the court.Overturning the special CBI court’s verdict that jailed Ram Rahim for life, HC noted that the preacher, as “head of the socio-spiritual organisation Dera Sacha Sauda, is a prominent public personality with both supporters and detractors”. Public figures often remain in the spotlight “at times for good reasons and at times for bad ones,” the bench said, adding that their prominence can influence the narrative surrounding criminal allegations.The bench also noted a “greater possibility” that those who executed the killing — Krishan Lal, Nirmal and Kuldeep Singh — may have acted on their own rather than on instructions from the Dera chief.HC observed that where two possibilities reasonably exist, one pointing to the commission of the crime and the other to innocence, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt.Conflicting statements by Khatta Singh were another factor casting doubt on Ram Rahim’s involvement in the murder case, HC said. “He (Khatta) chose to remain silent for a number of years and then kept tossing from one side to the other like a ping pong ball. Even on Dec 26, 2006, when he opened up for the first time, he did not implicate Dera chief in the present case and talked only about the Ranjit Singh murder case. If he was under threat, it is not understood why he was under threat only in this case and not in the Ranjit Singh case in which he stated that a conspiracy had been hatched by Dera chief. Under the circumstances, this court is not inclined to believe his version that he was under threat from the Dera as a result of which he had not deposed earlier,” HC observed in its 113-page verdict.Haryana cop’s statement not recordedHC also took note that Haryana SI Ram Chander — who had recorded the statement of Ram Chander Chhatrapati at PGI-Rohtak on Oct 26, 2002, after he was shot — was not examined.“It is extremely strange that this very important witness was given up by the prosecution as being unnecessary,” the bench said, adding: “One could still have understood had the witness been given up as having been ‘won over’. In the considered opinion of this court, he was the most important witness. In so far as Krishal Lal, Kuldeep and Nirmal are concerned, this court has held that there was other clinching evidence against them. In so far as Ram Rahim is concerned, since the charge is only that of criminal conspiracy, the version of SI Ram Chander would be of extreme importance on either side.”According to HC, the effort may have been to implicate the Dera chief, which “was not being fulfilled with the statement recorded by SI Ram Chander”. In any case, doubt is created in the mind of the court, once such an important statement is not brought on record and such an important witness is not examined. The benefit of the doubt necessarily has to go to the accused,” observed the court while giving a clean chit to Dera chief in murder case.Chhatrapati’s statementHC also observed that no effort was made to record Chhatrapati’s statement while he was in PGI Rohtak and his general condition was fair and stable right from Oct 26, 2002, to at least Nov 1, 2002. It is extremely strange that all this while, apart from the statement of Chhatrapati having been recorded on Oct 26 by ASI Ram Chander, no effort was made to record his statement, HC said.Other accused held guiltyIn its detailed verdict, HC held that evidence conclusively proves that Chhatrapati died from gunshot injuries, hence the trial court’s findings are based upon sound reasoning and a close and in-depth examination of the record.The bench held that a lot of emphasis was laid on the size of the recovered bullet. It was argued that the bullet could not fit into the barrel of the revolver, so there was no question of it having been fired from the said revolver. “This argument is also devoid of merit and is rejected, keeping in view the trustworthy statements of witnesses. It also has to be borne in mind that the revolver was of .32 bore i.e. the bore had a diameter of .32″, which comes to 8.1mm or 0.81cm. It cannot, therefore, be said that the bullets were of a size which could not have fit into the barrel,” HC observed.Dera chief not named in initial stageHC held that Chhatrapati’s son stated that he suspected that the attack on his father was carried out by Dera Sacha Sauda people. However, the Dera chief was not named at this stage, nor was he named by any of the co-accused in their disclosure statements, it noted, adding that even after CBI took over investigation, Ram Rahim was never named.Solitary witness not credibleAccording to the bench it would first examine whether the solitary witness to the alleged conspiracy was reliable. “If we examine the sequence of events, the answer to this is in the negative. The trial court, in the considered opinion of this court, did not examine this aspect of the matter from the correct perspective,” HC held.
