HC upholds virtual testimony in Dera Sacha Sauda castration case

The case stems from horrific allegations dating back more than a decade, centered on claims that doctors loyal to Ram Rahim Singh performed forced castrations on hundreds of young male devotees at the Dera Sacha Sauda headquarters in Sirsa, Haryana. These procedures were purportedly intended to ensure the followers’ unwavering devotion by suppressing sexual desires. The scandal first surfaced publicly in 2012 through a petition filed by human rights activists, highlighting the severe human rights violations within the sect.

In response to the outcry, the High Court in December 2014 directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe the matter. The CBI registered a case and, after a thorough investigation, filed a chargesheet in 2015 under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including those related to causing hurt, criminal conspiracy, and unnatural offenses. Supplementary chargesheets followed in 2018 and 2020, framing charges against Ram Rahim Singh, Dr. Pankaj Garg, and Dr. Mahender Pratap Singh, the petitioner in this latest challenge and one of the accused doctors.

The trial, now in its advanced stages before a Special Judicial Magistrate in Panchkula, involves 92 witnesses. Earlier this year, the trial court allowed one of the central witnesses to be cross-examined via video conferencing, citing practical difficulties in ensuring physical appearance. One of the accused doctors challenged the order in the High Court, arguing it would deprive him of a fair trial.

Delivering the verdict, Justice Aman Chaudhary held that video conferencing meets the legal requirement of “presence” under Section 273 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in State of Maharashtra vs. Praful B. Desai (2003), the court noted: “Video-conferencing has nothing to do with virtual reality… one is actually seeing and hearing what is happening.”

Justice Chaudhary further reasoned that denying video testimony could prejudice the prosecution, especially since the witness’s evidence is vital for the ends of justice. He highlighted potential delays, expenses, and inconveniences in securing physical attendance, particularly given the case’s international human rights dimensions.

At the same time, Justice Chaudhary cautioned that virtual testimony should remain an exception, not the rule, and should only be permitted when physical presence is impracticable.

The ruling marks another setback for Ram Rahim Singh, already serving life sentences for rape and murder.

From the homepage

Govt cancels foreign funding licence of Sonam Wangchuk’s NGO amid Ladakh protests

‘Intent to malign reputation’: Sameer Wankhede moves Delhi High Court against Aryan Khan’s ‘The Ba***ds of Bollywood’

After protests and deaths, the crackdown: 50 people picked up, Congress councillor booked in Leh