It was October 24, 2002—the day the murder of a journalist in Haryana’s Sirsa district sent shock waves through the town. Ram Chandra Chhatrapati, editor of Poora Sach, a local tabloid, sat down for dinner around 8 pm with his two sons and daughter. Minutes later, he was called out by some individuals who shot at him; his younger son, then 13, saw the shooting.

Ram Chandra Chhatrapati was also a member of a rationalist group called Tarksheel Society. A month later, Chhatrapati died in a Delhi hospital of septicaemia caused by the bullet injuries. After 17 years and a protracted trial, in January 2019, Gurmeet Ram Rahim, the Dera head of Sacha Sauda, and three others were convicted in the murder of Chhatrapati. An appeal against the trial court verdict was filed in the Haryana High Court.

Seven years later, on March 7, 2026, a Haryana High Court Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Vikram Aggarwal held that the prosecution had not proved the guilt of the Dera head beyond “reasonable doubt”, whereas it could do so against the other three accused in the case. Ram Rahim was acquitted, and his conviction and sentencing by the trial court were set aside.

The bench observed that the trial court had not “examined the matter from the correct perspective”. It said that the Dera head was a public figure with a huge following and that such people were known to have admirers and enemies alike and were always in the news. The bench observed, “[In India] religion, caste, sects play an extremely important role” and lives are given and taken in the name of religion, caste, and sects, and disputes over temples, mosques and gurudwaras. It observed that it was aware that “followers cross limits and break laws when it comes to their faith”.

In short, the bench did not find any overwhelming evidence to determine that the Dera head was responsible for the murder and that it was not a step taken by his “staunch followers”. It observed that the absence of evidence had not been “discussed” adequately. There was a great possibility, it held, that the three people accused of the murder acted on their own accord.

Referring to apex court judgments on the reliability of witnesses, the court said that the prime prosecution witness, Khatta Singh, was not to be trusted and his statement was not corroborated. It observed that Khatta Singh “chose to remain silent for a number of years and then kept on tossing from one side to the other like a ping pong ball”. The court was convinced that he was not under any threat from the Dera and that fear of reprisal was not the reason why he did not depose earlier. The court was also convinced that he had been coerced into giving evidence by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which was in a hurry to complete the investigation.

The court held that “it was a matter of grave concern that a premier investigating agency adopted this kind of a methodology. The endeavour should have been to go to the bottom of the matter and bring out the truth.”

The victim’s statement

While Chhatrapati was still conscious, his statement was recorded by a sub-inspector (SI) in a Rohtak hospital (before he was shifted to Delhi). The recorded statement did not mention the Dera head, though Chhatrapati’s family insisted that the assaulted journalist told the SI of the Dera head’s involvement.

The court wondered why the prosecution did not examine this crucial witness, that is, the SI, more thoroughly and “gave up” on him. No statement was taken from the doctors who treated the journalist, whose condition was reportedly stable for almost a week after the shooting.

Talking to Frontline from Sirsa, Chhatrapati’s elder son, Anshul Chhatrapati, said: “It is highly disappointing. We will appeal against it. I do not want to say anything against the order but many things, like threats to my father, were not considered adequately. There was a lot of pressure from the Dera. That situation continues even now. Many things, like the gun used and a walkie-talkie set, were recovered. The gun was licensed to the Dera manager. When my father was hospitalised, he told us that he told the police that the Dera head was involved. He had written to the police, too, about the threats. Why did Khatta Singh, the prime witness, repeatedly change his statements? He was under pressure due to the influence of the Dera. When Ram Rahim was convicted of rape in 2017, his followers created havoc outside the court. The office of a paper called Lekha Jokha was vandalised by his followers for writing critical stories. Even now when he comes out on parole, he instructs his followers to be calm and not assemble at the Dera. This is the kind of influence he wields.”

Dera Sacha Sauda boasts a substantial following across at least four States, and entire families are part of its following. The Dera at Sirsa, a veritable fortress, was established in 1948. The present head, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, was the third successor who took charge in 1990. It is fairly well known that the Dera wielded considerable political and social clout in the region. The bulk of its following comprised small and marginal peasants, but some well-heeled people were also ardent followers. Political leaders of various hues were also known to pay obeisance to the Dera head and seek his support during elections.

There is a subaltern element to the multiple Deras in Punjab and Haryana. They claim to represent marginalised sections and those outside mainstream religion. Between 2015 and 2017 and prior to his conviction, Ram Rahim starred in and produced a slew of films, one of them titled grandiloquently as MSG: The Messenger of God. He even composed a devotional music video featuring him and titled Highway Love Charger.

The backstory

In 2002, the Dera became controversial when the contents of an anonymous letter dated May 8, 2002, and addressed to Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee was published in two dailies; one of them was Poora Sach. The letter was also copied to the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The writer requested an inquiry into alleged sexual exploitation of hundreds of sadhvis (women disciples) by the Dera head. In June 2002, Ranjit Singh, a Dera manager, was murdered, allegedly for leaking the contents of the letter. Two letters with similar contents were also sent to two members of the rationalist society of which Chhatrapati was a member.

The High Court took suo moto cognisance of the anonymous letters and ordered an inquiry.

Dissatisfied with the police inquiry, Chhatrapati’s family, meanwhile, petitioned the court. The court observed that the investigation was not of desirable standard, lacked focus, and had permitted important material evidence to vanish, resulting in erosion of public faith.

The investigations into the sexual exploitation case and the murder were transferred to the CBI and the agency was asked to complete investigations within six months. The court noted that the journalist’s family believed that he had been murdered at the behest of the Dera. The sons believed that the Dera held a grudge against their father for his articles critical of its activities.

It was observed by the court that at no stage was the Dera head’s involvement suspected and that it was not mentioned by anyone, not even the CBI. The court also observed that there were allegations about the involvement of the Dera in the sexual exploitation case and with respect to the murder.

The CBI inquiry dragged on for five years. In 2007, Khatta Singh, who was a driver at the Dera, told the CBI that he had travelled with the Dera head on October 23, 2002, to Jalandhar where the alleged shooters of Chhatrapati showed Ram Rahim the articles in the Poora Sach edition of that date. The provoked Dera head ordered that the journalist be eliminated.

On July 30, 2007, the CBI filed a supplementary charge sheet naming Ram Rahim in the murder case. In December 2008, charges under Section 120 B (conspiracy) were framed against him. Three others were also charged..

But Khatta Singh subsequently turned hostile. He claimed the CBI had forced him to say what he did by threatening to implicate him in two murder cases—that of Chhatrapati and of the brother of one of the victims of sexual exploitation at the Dera.

Following Ram Rahim’s conviction in the sexual exploitation case on August 25, 2017, Khatta Singh filed an application on September 16, 2017, stating that he had mustered the courage to disclose a truthful account in the case. Re-examined by the CBI, he reiterated his allegations against Ram Rahim. This solitary witness against the Dera chief in the murder case entered the witness box on April 23, 2018. But the damage was done. Seven years after the 2019 conviction by the trial court, Khatta Singh’s testimony was considered unreliable by the High Court.

In 2024, Ram Rahim was acquitted of the murder of Dera manager Ranjit Singh due to “tainted and sketchy” investigations.

Sentenced for 20 years for the rape of two of his disciples, Ram Rahim has been on furlough multiple times. In 2022, the Haryana government amended its furlough policy, relaxing the conditions of parole for convicted persons. On January 6, 2026, he was granted a 40-day parole. This was the 15th time he was on furlough since his conviction in 2017. In January 2024, he got parole for 50 days. His furloughs have often coincided with polls in Punjab and Haryana though he has been expressly forbidden to make speeches during elections.

The murder of Chhatrapati, a rationalist and a person committed to honest journalism, was a tragedy. He had exposed wrongdoing by an influential individual. The people who pulled the trigger to kill him are behind bars. Yet, was his murder only an impulsive act by fanatic followers, or were they mere instruments?

For the Chhatrapati family, justice seems to remain elusive.

Also Read | The law bends for godmen

Also Read | Victims of a guru