Rohtak, Haryana: Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, the controversial head of Dera Sacha Sauda, has been granted a 40-day parole, according to sources familiar with the development. Singh, who is serving a 20-year jail term at Sunaria Jail in Rohtak, was convicted in 2017 for raping two of his female disciples. The latest parole marks yet another temporary release in a long series of such permissions, which have drawn widespread public attention and criticism.

Singh’s parole history is extensive. Over the past several years, he has been granted multiple temporary releases, including a 40-day parole in August of last year, a 30-day parole in January, a 21-day furlough in April, and several other short-term releases around key political events, such as the Delhi assembly elections. Sources indicate that during these periods, Singh primarily stayed at the Dera Sacha Sauda ashram in Bagpat district, Uttar Pradesh.

The Dera Sacha Sauda, headquartered in Sirsa, Haryana, commands a significant following across Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, and other northern states. In Haryana alone, the organisation enjoys substantial support in districts such as Sirsa, Fatehabad, Kurukshetra, Kaithal, and Hisar. The Dera’s large network and political influence have often been cited as factors in the recurrent grants of parole to its leader, despite the gravity of his convictions.

Singh’s legal record includes more than the 2017 rape convictions. In 2019, he and three others were convicted for the murder of a journalist that occurred over 16 years ago. Despite these serious charges, Singh has been released from prison on 14 occasions since his 2017 conviction. Each temporary release has historically sparked debate about the appropriateness and legality of granting parole or furloughs to individuals convicted of heinous crimes.

Criticism of Singh’s repeated parole has come from several quarters, particularly Sikh organizations and legal experts. The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), which manages Sikh religious institutions and has often spoken on issues of criminal justice, has questioned the repeated practice of granting parole and furloughs to a convicted criminal. They argue that such temporary releases undermine the principles of justice and send the wrong signal to victims and society at large.

Public sentiment surrounding Singh is deeply polarized. While the Dera enjoys considerable support from its followers, who often cite his social and charitable initiatives, human rights advocates and victim rights groups argue that repeated temporary releases are insensitive to the survivors of his crimes and erode public trust in the criminal justice system. Each release has reignited debates about the balance between rehabilitation, legal rights of prisoners, and the moral obligation to uphold justice for victims.

Authorities have typically justified parole and furloughs on grounds of administrative discretion and statutory provisions that allow temporary release of prisoners for personal, medical, or social reasons. However, given Singh’s high-profile status and prior convictions for sexual assault and murder, his releases are closely monitored by both law enforcement and the media, with questions raised about whether similar privileges would be extended to ordinary convicts.

The Dera Sacha Sauda chief’s parole comes amid continued scrutiny from legal experts, political observers, and activists who argue that the repeated temporary releases highlight structural and procedural gaps in the way parole is administered in India. Advocates for reform point out that there is a need for stricter guidelines, particularly for prisoners convicted of sexual assault and violent crimes, to prevent potential abuse of parole provisions.

During previous paroles, Singh has been reported to engage with his followers, attend religious and social functions, and oversee activities of the Dera. These releases have often led to heightened security concerns in areas with a strong presence of Dera followers, requiring deployment of police and administrative machinery to manage crowds and prevent potential unrest.

Legal experts note that parole and furlough systems in India are intended to aid prisoner rehabilitation and allow temporary relief for personal emergencies. However, high-profile cases like that of Singh underscore the challenges authorities face in balancing legal provisions, public safety, and perceptions of justice. Critics argue that repeated short-term releases for convicted high-profile offenders may compromise public confidence in the criminal justice system and highlight inequalities in the administration of justice.

As Singh embarks on his latest 40-day parole, the focus remains on law enforcement monitoring, public safety, and ensuring that conditions of parole are strictly adhered to. The Haryana administration has historically maintained close surveillance over his movements during parole, and similar precautions are expected during this latest period.

The Dera Sacha Sauda chief’s repeated releases also continue to be a flashpoint in discussions about prisoner rights, the influence of religious and social organizations, and the need for judicial oversight in parole decisions. With a 20-year sentence still ongoing, Singh’s case remains emblematic of the complex interplay between high-profile criminal convictions, societal influence, and administrative discretion in India’s legal framework.

In conclusion, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh’s latest parole once again brings to the fore questions about the balance between statutory provisions for prisoner release, public sentiment, and the imperative to uphold justice for victims. As debates continue across legal, social, and political circles, authorities are tasked with navigating a sensitive situation where law, order, and public perception intersect in a highly charged environment.

---