Dera chief counsel questions ‘sealed bullet’ examination in journalist murder case

Chandigarh: Arguing the appeal of Sirsa-based Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim's against his conviction for the murder of journalist Ram Chander Chhatarpati, the defence counsel on Thursday claimed contradictions in the ballistic evidence.The counsel informed the Punjab and Haryana high court that the bullet recovered from Chhatarpati's body during the postmortem at AIIMs, New Delhi, on Nov 22, 2022, remained sealed from the time of recovery until it was opened in court. "If the bullet was still sealed with AIIMS seal when produced in court, the prosecution must explain how it was examined earlier by a Forensic Science Laboratory expert," the dera chief counsel said before a bench headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu. However, the CBI countered that the expert's signatures were on the body of the revolver, the drum, and the barrel, and appended only after inspecting the evidence. On this, the defence counsel argued that it was possible to engrave markings on a weapon barrel, but not on a fired bullet recovered from a human body. He claimed that the bullets allegedly recovered did not match with the revolver allegedly used in the offence. On Jan 17, 2019, a special CBI court, Panchkula, sentenced the dera chief and three others to life imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 for the 2002 murder of Sirsa-based journalist Ram Chander Chhatarpati, editor of ‘Poora Sach' newspaper. The dera chief challenged the conviction before the high court, claiming that he was falsely implicated by the CBI, as the first charge sheet against other accused, Nirmal, Kuldeep, and Krishan Lal, was already filed and none of them named the appellant as being involved in the conspiracy. The CBI, as well as the counsel representing the deceased journalist's family, strongly opposed the dera chief's plea. Finally, after hearing all the parties, the HC in Sept 2025 reserved its verdict in the matter. However, the matter was again listed for hearing by the high court following the "emergence of new facts" in the case. MSID:: 127933792 413 |