The bench’s ruling grants Rampal temporary release from his sentence, marking a pivotal shift in the long-running legal saga. His supporters welcomed the development, though legal scrutiny is expected to continue through the appeals process.
Rampal entered this case when a Hisar court convicted him under sections 302, 343 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code in October 2018. He was found guilty in connection with the death of a female follower inside his ashram during a high-profile trial linked to a violent standoff in Barwala.
Legal observers note that the Punjab and Haryana High Court has previously ruled that an application for suspension of sentence filed alongside a criminal revision petition remains maintainable in law, even if the convict has not surrendered after conviction. However, the court retains discretion to evaluate whether relief is warranted, based on the petitioner’s conduct and the merits of the appeal.
In the current matter, Rampal’s legal team emphasised that many of his co‑accused had seen their sentences suspended, presenting a case for parity. Commentators suggest the bench may have been influenced by the balance between legal consistency and humanitarian considerations after a decade-long incarceration.
The decision comes amid growing debate over judicial discretion and the broader principles underpinning sentence suspension decisions. A senior law commentator pointed out that the court must weigh the public interest, the gravity of the offence and any demonstrated remorse or rehabilitation. The fact that the offence involved a death inside a religious establishment underscores the complexity of balancing legal precedent with societal sentiment.
Rampal’s appeal against his conviction is still pending. Meanwhile, the suspension order is likely to be conditional and paired with surety or bond requirements, standard in such cases. Legal experts anticipate additional hearings to determine whether the High Court may ultimately stay his sentence indefinitely or dismiss the appeal.
The milieu surrounding Rampal is not new to legal wrangling. In 2021, the High Court suspended life sentences for two of his key aides, Raj Kapoor and Rajender, on grounds that they had already served a substantial part of their terms. Yet, the scale and symbolism of the preacher’s own conviction have made his case far more emblematic.
The evolution of this case is certain to draw attention as observers watch how judicial discretion intersects with prolonged detention, procedural fairness and the interface between religious authority and legal accountability.