Gurugram: The Special CBI Court in Panchkula has allowed a prime witness to appear via video conferencing from the US in the case of alleged castration of his followers against Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh.
The witness, Hans Raj Chauhan, alias Hakiki Hans, known in the case records as PW-1 (prosecution witness-1) and the case complainant, had blown the whistle on forced castrations of Dera believers, a charge that makes the basis of the CBI case under sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 326 (voluntary causing grievous hurt), 417 (cheating), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered on 1 January, 2015.
The decision of the court, delivered on Saturday by Special Judicial Magistrate Anil Kumar Yadav, came despite stiff resistance from the defence counsels.
The case is based on charges that Gurmeet Ram Rahim and others hatched a conspiracy to neuter male devotees at the Dera Sacha Sauda complex in Sirsa, Haryana, in the name of spiritual cleansing.
The complainant, a material witness who had also undergone the procedure himself, had been examined in 2018 on three dates—21 August, 19 September and 28 September.
Now settled in the US, he made an application asking for his cross-examination to be done remotely, citing the 13,000-km distance, heavy travel costs, personal inconvenience, and an alleged threat to his life.
His counsel submitted that in view of the “threat perception”, the applicant and his family was provided security for the past 10-12 years. But on 25 May, the security was withdrawn without assigning any reason. The counsel also mentioned that in view of the “grim situation”, the victim has moved to the US in 2024.
“Moreover, the accused No.1 (Ram Rahim) is being released on parole time and again despite the fact that he is a habitual criminal held guilty in several cases including rape and murder cases and there is danger to the life of applicant from accused No.1,” the counsel said.
Also read: Out on parole ahead of Delhi polls, Ram Rahim returns to Sirsa 1st time since 2017 conviction
Court’s rationale: Balancing justice and practicality
The court’s 20-page order, accessed by ThePrint, carefully took into consideration the objections of the defence while relying on legal maxims and technological advancements to uphold its decision.
The counsel for the witness, aided by advocates Navkiran Singh, Navdeep Singh, Harpreet Kaur, Harmeet Singh, and Simandeep Singh, had submitted that the complainant’s key position as a whistleblower and his present location in the US make it imperative to use video conferencing.
The counsels referred to a string of decisions of the Supreme Court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court, such as Ram Ji Dass Vs Kulwant Rai Sethi (2024), State of Maharashtra Vs Dr Praful B. Desai (2003), and Sucha Singh Vs Ajmer Singh (2017), which favoured virtual evidence to reduce delays and expenses.
The Special Court emphasised that Section 310 of the BNSS, which is equivalent to Section 275 of the CrPC, clearly provides for evidence recording through audio-video electronic means in the presence of the accused’s counsel.
The court also mentioned the efforts of the Supreme Court to harness technology to minimise court footfall, especially in cases with witnesses overseas.
“Hon’ble Supreme Court has instructed all the courts to encourage the utilisation of modern technology in the form of video conferencing,” the order read, adding that no prejudice would be done to the accused by permitting virtual testimony.
Defence’s objections
The defence, led by lawyers P.K. Sandhir, Amar D. Kamra, and N.P.S. Warnich, among others, launched a strong challenge.
The counsels for the Dera chief and the other accused contended that the application, moved by the witness and not the prosecution, was not maintainable and hinted at ulterior motives such as the witness applying for asylum in the US.
The counsels also tried to draw the court’s attention to the practical limitations of facing the voluminous documents with the witness through video conferencing, as there was no facility for a document visualiser as well as audio-visual recording facilities available in the court.
These objections were, however, rejected as untenable by the Special Judicial Magistrate.
The court explained that a witness is legally entitled to shift such an application, and the fact that the registration of the FIR was the result of an order by the Punjab & Haryana High Court.
Addressing the issue of document confrontation, the court suggested the use of a document visualiser and ordered documents to be sent by email in advance to the witness.
To address time zone differences, the court instructed the CBI’s Investigating Officer to coordinate with the Indian Consulate in the US through the Ministry of External Affairs to schedule the deposition during court hours, ensuring the integrity of the process.
The court also declined the defence’s argument that as the witness’ did not report threats while testifying in 2018, his request now was invalid.
“Even assuming the version of the witness about receipt of any threat from the accused is not accepted, the witness has every right to move the application on the grounds of long distance, enormous expense, and undue hardship,” the court order said.
The court directed the Investigating Officer to make arrangements within one month with the consulate and report the date of the hearing to the court. Besides, the court asked for a document visualiser and audio-visual recording facilities from the CBI, referring to existing infrastructural deficiencies in the Special Court.
What is the castration case against Ram Rahim?
The case of castration against Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh started with a petition filed by a former devotee, Hansraj Chauhan, saying he and about 400 other believers were compelled to be castrated by the Dera’s order. The victims were said to have been informed that the procedure would take them closer to God.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court directed a BI inquiry into the charges in 2014, which resulted in the submission of a chargesheet against Ram Rahim and two physicians, Pankaj Garg and M.P. Singh, who are alleged to have carried out the surgeries on 1 February 2018.
The Dera chief is already in jail for 20 years for raping two women followers and has also been accused of murder.
(Edited by Viny Mishra)
Also read: Rape-murder convict Ram Rahim out on furlough again, his 13th release since conviction in 2017