1.Jessica lalmurder case

2. Jessica Lal1965-1999Born5 January 1965IndiaDied30 April 1999 (aged 34)New DelhiOccupationModelJessicaLal (19651999) was a model in New Delhi,who was working as a celebrity barmaid at acrowded socialite party when she was shotdead at around 2 am on 30 April 1999.Dozens of witnesses pointed to SiddharthVashisht, also known as Manu Sharma, theson of Venod Sharma, a wealthy andinfluential Congress-nominated Member ofParliament from Haryana, as the murderer. 3. In the ensuing trial, Manu Sharma and anumber of others were acquitted on 21February 2006.Following intense media and publicpressure, the prosecution appealed andthe Delhi High Court conductedproceedings on a fast track with dailyhearings conducted over 25 days. Thetrial court judgment was overturned, andManu Sharma was found guilty of havingmurdered Lal. He was sentenced to life 4. On 29 April 1999, Jessica Lal was one of several modelsworking an unlicensed bar at a party in the Tamarind Court,which was within the Qutub Colonnade, a refurbished palaceoverlooking theQutub Minar in Mehrauli. By midnight the barhad run out of liquor and it would in any event have ceasedsales at 12.30 am. At 2 am Lal refused to serve Manu Sharma,who was with a group of three friends, despite him offeringher 1000 Rupees. Sharma then produced a .22 pistol and firedit twice: the first bullet hit the ceiling and the second hit Lalin the head and killed her.[1][2][3]A mlee followed the shooting, during which Sharma and hisfriends Amardeep Singh Gill, Vikas Yadav, and AlokKhanna left the scene.[1] Thereafter, it was reported thatcontact could not be made with Sharmas family, including hismother, and that they were "absconding".[4] After eludingpolice for a few days, with the assistance of accomplices,Khanna and Gill were arrested on 4 May and Sharma on 6 May.The murder weapon was not recovered and was thought to 5. The case by now involved several prominent people. Sharmahimself was the son of Venod Sharma, who at the time of theshooting was a former minister of the national government andby the time of the subsequent trial was a minister inthe Haryana state government. Yadav was the son of anotherstate politician, D. P. Yadav. Bina Ramani, who had redevelopedthe premises where the party took place, was a socialite andfashion designer who allegedly had contacts in high places andwhose daughter knew Lal as a fellow-model. Singh managed thedistribution of Coca-Colain Chandigarh.[5]Amit Jhigan, an accomplice of Sharma, was arrested on 8 Mayand charged with conspiring to destroy evidence, as it wasbelieved that he had retrieved the pistol from its originalhiding place near to the club. While he was remanded incustody, Yadav was still at large and it had also provedimpossible to locate his father, who had promised to deliverhis son to the police.[3] 6. It had by now become clear that the party, whichwas claimed to be a farewell function for Ramanishusband, George Mailhot, had in fact been open toanyone willing to pay. Ramani, her husband, and herdaughter Malini were arrested on the same day asJhigan. They were charged with operating an illegalbar and, although released on bail, had tosurrender their passports. There were severallines of inquiry regarding the family, includingwhether or not Ramani a UK national had thenecessary permits to operate a business in India.Another concern was to establish whether or notshe had concealed evidence by ordering thecleaning up of blood at the premises, although by19 May it had been announced that charges relating 7. Yadav presented himself to Delhi police on 19 Maybut was able immediately to leave because he hadacquired anticipatory bail papers. He claimed to havebeen in Bombay and elsewhere during the previousfew weeks, and refused to comment regardingwhether he had been in contact with his father. Headmitted that Sharma had stayed with him on thenight of the murder but denied being present himselfat the Tamarind Club or having any knowledge of theevents that had occurred there until the next day,when he told Sharma to surrender to the police. Acomplex legal situation involving his paperwork meantthat the police did not arrest Yadav at thattime.[6] Subsequently, he had short spells in custodyand longer periods when he was freed on bail, withdecisions and overturnings of them being made in 8. sheets were filed with the court on 3 August1999. Sharma was charged with murder,destruction of evidence and other offences,while Khanna, Gill and Yadav faced lessercharges, including destruction of evidence,conspiracy and harbouring a suspeCharge ct.Others similarly charged were Shyam SunderSharma, Amit Jhingan, Yograj Singh,Harvinder Chopra, Vikas Gill, Raja Chopra,Ravinder Krishan Sudan and Dhanraj. The lastthree named had not at that time been 9. According to the BBC, India has a "snail-pacedjudicial system" and its conviction rate is below30%.[9] Seven years after the case was opened, on21 February 2006, nine of the twelve accusedwere acquitted, including Sharma. Jhingan hadalready been discharged and both Ravinder KishanSudan and Dhanraj, were still at large. Theprosecution had been affected by 32 of theirwitnesses becoming "hostile". Theseincluded Shayan Munshi, Andleeb Sehgal, KaranRajput, Shiv Lal Yadav and two ballistics experts,Roop Singh and Prem Sagar. Subsequently, inFebruary 2011, it was announced that all 32 wouldbe facing charges for perjury.[10][11] 10. the trial judge commented after theoutcome thatthe two cartridges, emptied shells ofwhich were recoverThe court hasacquitted them because the Delhipolice failed to sustain the groundson which they had built up their case.The police failed to recover theweapon which was used to fire atJessica Lal as well as prove theirtheory that ed from the spot, were[11] 11. The Hindu newspaper also reported that thejudge was aware that the prosecution was notassisted by the hostility of their witnesses, threeof whom had seen the shooting, and by the factthat forensic examination contradicted policeclaims that two cartridges found at the scene werefired from the same weapon. Finally, the judgebelieved that the police had failed to provide asufficient explanation of the chain of events whichled up to the killing.[11] 12. Reaction to acquittalThe reaction to the verdict was one of outcry.The New York Times described the situation afortnight laterMost noticeably among Indias urbanmiddle class, the acquittal has released apent-up frustration with an oftenblundering and corrupt law enforcementbureaucracy and a deep disgust with therich and famous who, by all appearances,manipulated it to their advantage.[12] 13. There were numerous protestcampaigns, including onesinvolving SMS and email, seeking toobtain redress for the perceivedmiscarriage of justice. Rallies andmarches took place, as well ascandelit vigils.[12]V. N. Khare, a former Chief Justiceof India, implicitly criticised the trialjudge, saying that it should have been 14. Sometimes when the police, the prosecutionand the lawyers all have connections with thecriminals, the judge should be slightlyproactive. He should try to get to the truth,and not depend totally on the evidenceprovided in court. In a case like this, he is notgoing to get proper evidence. Mostly thejudiciary is depended on the evidence providedby the investigative agencies, but now whenthe situation is so bad, the judges have towake up, be proactive and find the truth.[9]The Delhi police commissioner announced aninvestigation to determine where things had gonewrong, and said that among other things it wouldexamine whether there had been a conspiracy, 15. The police petitioned the High Court fora review of the case and on 22 March2006 the court issued warrants againstthe nine defendants who had stood trial.Eight of them were subsequently bailed inApril, with restrictions imposed on theirability to leave the country. The ninthdefendant, Gill, had not been traced sincethe original issue of warrants in March.[13] 16. On 9 September 2006, a stingoperation by the newsmagazine Tehelka was shown on theTV channel STAR News. This appearedto show that witnesses had beenbribed and coerced into retractingtheir initial testimony. Venod Sharmawas named in the expos as one whohad paid money to some of thewitnesses.[14] Facing pressure fromthe central Congress leaders, Venod 17. JudgementOn 15 December 2006, the High Court ruled thatSharma was guilty based on existing evidence, and alsocriticised the trial judge, S. L. Bhayana.[15]The judgement said that the lower court had been laxin not considering the testimony of witnesses such asBina Ramani and Deepak Bhojwani, stating regardingthe treatment of the latters evidence thatWith very great respect to the learned judge[Bhayana], we point out that this manner of testingthe credibility of the witness is hardly a rule ofappreciation of evidence. ... Obviously, this reflectstotal lack of application of mind and suggests a hastyapproach towards securing a particular end, namely 18. In particular, the key witness Munshi came infor serious criticism. The judgement says, ofhis earlier repudiation of the FirstInformation Report that "[Munshi] is nowclaiming that the said statement was recordedin Hindi while he had narrated the whole storyin English as he did not know Hindi at all ... Wedo not find this explanation of Munshi to beconvincing." Regarding Munshis testimony thattwo guns were involved, the judgement says:"In court he has taken a somersault and cameout with a version that there were twogentlemen at the bar counter. ... [W]e have no 19. On 20 December 2006, Sharma was punishedwith a sentence of life imprisonment and afine. The other accused, Yadav and Gill, werefined and given four years rigorousimprisonment. A plea for Sharma to besentenced to death was rejected on thegrounds that the murder, although intentional,was not premeditated and Sharma was notconsidered to be a threat to society.[16]Sharmas lawyer announced that the decisionwould be appealed in Supreme Court becausethe judgement was wrong in holding BinaRamani to be a witness.[1 20. On 24 September 2009, the government inDelhi paroled Sharma for a 30 day period sothat he could attend to some matters relatingto his sick mother and the familybusiness. [17] The parole was extended byfurther 30 days, during which he was seen tobe partying in a night-club and his motherundertook public functions.[18]Sharma returned himself to Tihar jail on 10November 2009, two weeks before his paroleexpired.[18] 21. Supreme the Supreme Court of India ofOn 19 April 2010,Court confirmation sentencesapproved the sentences and said thatThe evidence regarding the actual incident, thetestimonies of witnesses, the evidence connecting thevehicles and cartridges to the accused ManuSharma, as well as his conduct after the incidentprove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The HighCourt has analysed all the evidence and arrived at thecorrect conclusion.[19]Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, who representedSharma in the Supreme Court, assailed the High Courtverdict, alleging that the media had prejudged theissue and conducted a campaign to vilify his client. TheSupreme Court accepted that there had been anelement of "trial by media" but believed that it had 22. The Ruchika Girhotra Case involves the molestation of 14-year-oldRuchika Girhotra in 1990 by the Inspector General of Police ShambhuPratap Singh Rathore (S.P.S. Rathore) in Haryana, India. After she madea complaint, the victim, her family, and her friends were systematicallyharassed by the police leading to her eventual suicide. On December 22,2009, after 19 years, 40 adjournments, and more than 400 hearings, thecourt finally pronounced Rathore guilty under Section354 IPC (molestation) and sentenced him to six months imprisonment anda fine of Rs 1,000. The CBI had opposed Rathores plea and had sought anenhancement of his sentence from six months to the maximum of twoyears after his conviction. Rejecting his appeal against his conviction by aCentral Bureau of Investigation (CBI) special court, Chandigarh DistrictCourt on May 25 sentenced the disgraced former police official to oneand a half years of rigorous imprisonment, enhancing his earlier six-monthsentence and immediately taken into custody and taken to the Burailprison.[1][2] On 11 November 2010, the Supreme Court granted bail to S P 23. Ruchika Girhotra was a student in Class X A (Batch of1991) at Sacred Heart School for Girls in Chandigarh.Her father, S.C Girhotra, was a manager with UCOBank. Her mother died when she was ten yearsold.[3][4] She had one brother, Ashu.Ruchika, along with her friend Aradhna Prakash, wasenrolled as a trainee at the Haryana Lawn TennisAssociation (HLTA).[5]Aradhnas parents Anand and Madhu Prakashattended over 400 hearings, after Ruchikas fatherand brother had to leave Panchkula due toharassment. Supreme Court lawyers Pankaj Bhardwajand Meet Malhotra fought the case for free since1996.[5][6] 24. Born in 1941 and a 1966-Batch Indian PoliceService officer of the Haryana Cadre, Rathorewas on deputation to Bhakhra BeasManagement Board as Director, Vigilance andSecurity, when he molested Ruchika. He wasthe founding president of the Haryana LawnTennis Association, and Rathore used thegarage of his house at 469 Sector 6,Panchkula, as its office.[7] The house used tohave a clay tennis court behind it, built byencroaching on government land. A few younggirls played in this court.[5] Action by localauthorities later led to the tennis court being 25. Rathores wife Abha is an advocate. Shedefended his case from thebeginning.[5] She practices law inPanchkula and Chandigarh from her officein Sector 6, Panchkula.[9] Ajay Jain isanother counsel for Rathore.[10]Rathores daughter, Priyanjali, wasRuchikas classmate. She is now apractising lawyer.[3] His son, Rahul, usedto practice law at the Punjab and HaryanaHigh Courts. He is an advocate withCox & 26. Sub-Inspector Prem Dutt and AssistantSub-Inspectors Sewa Singh and JaiNarayan of the Crime InvestigationAgency (CIA) Staff Office in MansaDevi tortured Ashu under the directionsof Rathore.[12][13]Sewa Singh is currently the AssistantStation House Officer of Pinjore policestation. He has not reported for worksince the sentencing of Rathore creatednational headlines.[14] He lives in Ratpurcolony in Pinjore. Ajay Jain is also serving 27. Ruchika was a promising tennis player. On August 11,1990, Rathore visited Ruchikas house and met herfather S. C. Girhotra. As head of the Haryana LawnTennis Association, Rathore promised to get specialtraining for Ruchika. He requested that Ruchika meethim the following day in connection with this.[16]On August 12 (Sunday), Ruchika, along with her friendAradhana (Aradhana Prakash), went to play at the lawntennis court and met Rathore in his office (in thegarage of his house). On seeing both of them, Rathoreasked Aradhana to call the tennis coach (Mr. Thomas)to his room. Aradhana left, and Rathore was alone withRuchika. He immediately grabbed her hand and waistand pressed his body against hers. Ruchika tried to[16] 28. But Aradhana returned and witnessed what was goingon. On seeing her, Rathore released Ruchika and fellback in his chair. He then asked Aradhana to go outof his room and personally bring the coach with her.When she refused, Rathore rebuked Aradhana loudly,asking her to bring the coach. He insisted thatRuchika stayed in his room, but she managed to runout.[16]Ruchika told Aradhana everything that happened.Both girls did not tell anybody at first. The next day,they did not go to play tennis. The following day,August 14, they changed the time of practice to avoidRathore, and played till 6:30 pm. However, as theywere leaving, the ball picker, Patloo, told themRathore had called them to his office. It was at this 29. Following this, Panchkula residents, mostly parents oftennis players, gathered at the residence of AnandPrakash, father of Ruchikas friend Aradhana, anddecided that some strong action must be taken byway of bringing up the matter with higherauthorities.They could not contact either the Chief MinisterHukum Singh or Home Minister Sampat Singh, butmet Home Secretary J K Duggal, who, on August 17,1990, discussed the matter with the Home Ministerand asked DGP Ram Rakshpal Singh toinvestigate.[18][19]Rathore allegedly paid some residents of Rajiv Colony(a slum) in Panchkula and also garnered the support ofpeople from his community in Naraingarh, Ambala 30. On September 3, 1990, the inquiry reportsubmitted by R R Singh to Home Secretary JK Duggal indicted Rathore.[18] It recommendedthat an FIR be filed immediately againstRathore. Duggal forwarded the report to theHome Minister Sampat Singh, who failed toforward it to the Chief Minister for necessaryaction.[21] The Home Secretary who replaceDuggal never followed up on the report.[21]The report also revealed that an ex-MLA, Jagjeet Singh Tikka organised a largegroup of men to shout slogans in front ofRuchikas house and harass herfamily.[21] Rathore enjoyed the patronage of 31. Instead of filing an FIR as recommended bythe report, the government preferreddepartmental action, and, on May 28, 1991,issued a chargesheet against Rathore.However, the governments legalremembrancer, R. K. Nehru, suggested in 1992that state government was not competent toissue the chargesheet, insisting that an FIR beregistered. Then, the C M Bhajan Lals officereferred the case to the chief secretary foradvice. Eventually, no action was taken.[18]Rathore was enjoying support from all theChief Ministers and was using his influence and 32. On September 20, 1990, two weeks after the inquiryindicted Rathore, Ruchika was expelled from herschool, Sacred Heart School for Girls, in Sector 26,Chandigarh. Ruchika had studied there from Class I.The school actively plotted against Ruchika. Theofficial reason for her expulsion was non-payment offees. The school had actually refused to accept herfees. No notice was given to Ruchika for non-paymentof fees, as is the schools normal procedure. Theschools brochure states that non-payment of feescan only lead to being disallowed to take exams. It isnot grounds for expulsion.[28][29] 33. late fees in 1990, at least 8 students paid their fees laterthan Ruchika did, but no action was taken against them.Ironically, the defaulters included Rathores daughterPriyanjali.[30][31]The principal of the school, Sister Sebastina, who stilloccupies the office, accepted to the magisterial inquiry thatshe personally issued instructions for the removal of Ruchikasname from school register.[31]Ruchikas expulsion from school was later used by Rathoreslawyers to question her character.It has been alleged that Ruchika was expelled to avoidembarrassing Rathores daughter Priyanjali, who was herclassmate.[32]The school tried to stall the magisterial inquiry into Ruchikasdismissal. Sister Sebastina only appeared before the inquiryafter five days.[31] The Chandigarh authorities threatened theschool with legal action if they continued to stall the [7] 34. After her expulsion, Ruchika confined herselfindoors. Whenever she went out she was followed andabused by Rathores henchmen.[33] Rathore deployedpolicemen in plainclothes in front of Ruchikas houseto keep an eye on the family.[13]False cases of theft, murder and civil defamationwere filed against Ruchikas father and her 10-year-old brother Ashu. Five theft cases against Ashu wereregistered by Sub-Inspector Prem Dutt The caseswere filed when KP Singh was the Superintendent ofPolice, Ambala. Singh has been named in an FIR filedby Ashu.[34] Singh later provided Rathores advocatesa statement absolving Rathore.[35] Singh is now theInspector General of Police (Training) in Haryana andworks at the Chandigarh Head Office.[ 35. Cases were filed against Anand Parkash, his wife Madhu, andtheir minor daughter Aradhana.Anand Parkash worked as Chief Engineer in the Haryana StateAgriculture Marketing Board and had a spotless record untilthis incident. Rathore then instigated more than 20 complaintsagainst him. He was suspended from his job for some time anddemoted to Superintendent Engineer. He was eventually givenpremature retirement. He did, however, challenge thegovernment orders and was given relief by the court andcleared of all the complaints.[36][37]Aradhana, who is the sole witness in the molestation case, hadten civil cases filed against her by Rathore. She receivedabusive and threatening calls for months until she got marriedand left for Australia.[36] Pankaj Bhardwaj, the lawyer whotook up Ruchikas case, was slapped with two court cases byRathore -a defamation case and a case for compensation.[36] 36. When Rathore was heading the vigilance team in the HaryanaState Electricity Board (HSEB), he sent special teams fromBhiwani to raid houses of several of hiscomplainants.[36] Rathore also filed two cases against each ofthe journalists who had reported on the matter - one criminaland another civil - demanding compensation of Rs. 1 croreeach.[36]On September 23, 1993, Ruchikas then 13-year-old brother,Ashu, was picked up in the market place near his house bypolice in plain clothes. They drove him in a jeep to the CrimeInvestigation Agency (CIA) Staff Office in Mansa Devi.There, he was tortured by Sub-Inspector Prem Dutt andAssistant Sub-Inspectors Jai Narayan.[12][13]His hands were tied on his back and he was made to bend. Hisfeet were tied with a weight. He was kept in thisuncomfortable position for an extended period of time.[33]After some time, Rathore also arrived there. Ashu was thentortured further. A roller, referred to by the police as 37. While still in illegal confinement, Ashu was taken to his houseand beaten mercilessly in front of Ruchika by Rathore.Rathore then threatened her, saying that if she did not takeback the complaint, her father, and then she herself, wouldface the same fate.[40][41] Ashu was paraded in handcuffs in hisneighbourhood.[42]Ashu was picked up again on November 11, 1993. He wastortured again and was unable to walk due to the beatings. Hewas not given food or water for days at a stretch and wasbeaten mercilessly. He was repeatedly told to convince hissister to withdraw her complaint.[42] He was allegedly forcedto sign on blank papers, which were used by the police to showhis "confessions" that he stole 11 cars.[38] He would not bereleased until after his sisters suicide.[38]No charges were ever framed in any of these cases filedagainst Ashu.[21]The Panchkula Chief Judicial Magistrate exonerated Ashu in1997, saying he had no hesitation to pinpoint that nothing is 38. Gajinder Singh, a resident of Bihar, had beenarrested by the Panchkula Police for a car theft andpolice claimed he had named Ashu as his accomplices.Singh later absconded and was named a proclaimedoffender.[43][44] He has been arrested by a team ofHaryana Police assisted by their Pune counterparts onJanuary 9, 2010 from the Baner Road area, where hewas running a dhaba.[45]The Girhotras one-kanal bungalow in Sector 6Panchkula was forcibly sold to a lawyer working forRathore.[40] Ruchikas father was suspended from hisjob as bank manager, on charges of allegedcorruption, after coercion from Rathore.[36] Theymoved to the outskirts of Simla, and had to take up [ 39. On December 28, 1993, days after Ashu was paraded inhandcuffs in his locality,[12] Ruchika consumed poison. She diedthe next day. Rathore threw a party that night tocelebrate.[47]Rathore refused to release Ruchikas body to her fatherSubash unless he signed blank sheets of paper. The blankpapers were later used by the police to establish that thefamily had accepted Ruchikas forged autopsyreport.[48] Rathore also threatened to kill Ashu, who was still inillegal police custody.[13] At this time, Ashu was allegedlyunconscious in CIA lock-up. He had been stripped naked andbeaten the previous night by drunk policemen. He was broughtback to his house, still unconscious, after Ruchikas last riteswere over.[38][39] 40. The government closed the case filedagainst Rathore less than a weekafter her death.[51]Unable to bear the harassment, herfamily moved out of Chandigarh.[2]Just a few months later, Rathore waspromoted to additional DGP inNovember 1994, when Bhajan Lal wasthe chief minister. 41. In November 1994, Rathore was promoted. No actionwas taken on the inquiry report. Anand Parkashstarted trying to get copy of the report. After 3years, he finally obtained it in 1997, and in November,moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court. On August21, 1998, the High Court directed the CBI to conductan inquiry.In Oct 1999, the INLD government led by OmPrakash Chautala made Rathore the police chief(DGP) of the state.[24] His name was evenrecommended for a Presidents Police Medal ForDistinguished Service by the same government inNovember 1999.[52] Birbal Das Dhalia, who as then 42. Shanta Kumar, who was then vice-president ofthe BJP, in 2000, wrote a letter to OmPrakash Chautala, urging him to take strictaction against Rathore in the case.However, instead of acting on the letter,Chautala complained to then PrimeMinister Atal Bihari Vajpayee about it. ShantaKumar was the Minister for Consumer Affairsin the NDA government at the time.Chautalas Indian National Lok Dal was analliance partner.[54] 43. Ashus case had reached before the HC following suo motu cognizancetaken of a media report highlighting his plight,[47] by justice MehtabSingh Gill on December 12, 2000. The then chief justice had referredthe matter before a division bench comprising justice N K Sodhi andjustice N K Sood.[49]While deposing before the division bench, Ashu stated that he hadundergone inhuman treatment at the instance of Rathore and thePanchkula police. This was his first statement since the family wasforced to leave Panchkula. At the time of making the statement, thefamily was living in Sector-2, New Shimla.[49]On December 13, 2000, the division bench voiced support forcompensation to Ashu for the harassment caused to him at the hands ofPanchkula police.[44]Rathore filed an affidavit in 2001 denying the allegations.[33]The HC then referred the inquiry to sessions judge Patiala. OnSeptember 3, 2002, Ashu detailed the torture he was put through to aPatiala Sessions Court.[33][49] 44. On August 21, 1998, the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the CBIto conduct an inquiry.The High Court had ordered completion of investigation of the case andfiling of chargesheet expeditiously, preferably within sixmonths.[55] However, more than a year passed before the CBI filed achargesheet.[55]On November 16, 2000, the CBI filed a charge sheet against Rathore.Despite the CBI chargesheet, the Chautala government allowed Rathore tocontinue as police chief.[24]The case was put to hearing in the CBI special court in Ambala fromNovember 17. The hearings in Ambala would continue till May 2006.[24]The chargesheet was filed only under Section 354 (molestation). Abetmentto suicide was inexplicably not included.[55]On October 8, 2001, counsel for Anand Parkash moved an applicationdemanding the addition of abetment to suicide (306 of IPC) againstRathore. Rathore argued that Prakash had no standing to move thecourt [1]. 45. However, in a scathing judgment on October 23, 2001, Special CBI JudgeJagdev Singh Dhanjal demanded that the offence be added. In his 21-pagejudgement, the CBI Judge underlined witness statements, including thoseof Ruchikas father, Anand Parkash, friend Aradhana and others in addingSection 306 (abetment) of IPC against Rathore.[56][57] Dhanjal was forcedto take premature retirement two years later.[6]However, in February 2002, Justice K. C. Kathuria of the Punjab andHaryana High Court dismissed the CBI courts decision to register an FIRagainst Rathore for abetment to suicide, claiming the lack of a complaintregarding harassment.[44] Justice Kathuria was a neighbour of theGirhotras, with whom he was engaged in a property dispute.[6]In another glaring conflict of interest, he was also a close relative of O. P.Kathuria who is an associate of Rathore, had served as secretary of theHaryana Lawn Tennis Association which was floated by Rathore.[6]Justice Kathuria is now the President of the Haryana State ConsumerDisputes Redressal Commission.Incredibly, after filing the chargesheet in 2000, the CBI took 7 years torecord evidence from 16 prosecution witnesses. On the other hand, thedefence counsel took nine months to complete examination of 13 out of thetotal 17 witnesses.[55] 46. Rathore tried to use his influence with the CBI. R M Singh,who was CBI Joint Director in 1998 and retired in 2001, saidRathore was tracking the case. Once the file arrived atSinghs desk, he started getting frequent visits to his officefrom Rathore. Rathore visited multiple times in 1998, trying toinfluence the CBI to clear him on all charges. Rathore hadlearnt that Singh was constructing a house in Gurgaon, andoffered to provide building materials and other assistance.Singh also found out that Rathore had also approaced theInvestigating Officer for the case, Rajesh Ranjan, CBIsDeputy Superintendent of Police. When he failed to influencethe officers, Rathore had the case transferred. Rathoreenjoyed access to all levels of the CBI since he was DGP.[47][58]Ruchikas was one of the few cases heard in three subordinatecourts of three different states: Haryana, Punjab andChandigarh - apart from one in high court and the SupremeCourt as well. Around 15 applications were accepted in Punjab 47. For example, on January 23, 2006, Rathore moved anapplication demanding transfer of trial from AmbalaCBI Special Magistrate Ritu Garg to any other court.The application was moved when evidence of only twoprosecution witnesses was remaining. The groundsclaimed was that Rathore knew Ritus father and thatRathores son Rahul was a friendly withRitu.[60] Surprisingly, the CBI didnt object. In hisreply filed in February 2006, S S Lakra, the thenAdditional Superintendent of Police, New Delhi, saidhe did not object to the transfer, allegedly so thecase would "conclude expeditiously". The case wasthen transferred to Patiala.[60] Again when the casewas at the last stage, Rathore accused the thenSpecial CBI Judge of Patiala, Rakesh Kumar Gupta, ofoverawing the defence witnesses and scolding 48. Rathore also used other technical grounds likedemanding that the trial be videographed to causemore delays. Ironically, he later claimed that the longdelays were grounds for a reduced sentence.[61]On November 5, 2009, the case was transferredfrom the Ambala court to CBI Chandigarh. InDecember, the court closed all final arguments, gaveits verdict and on December 21, special judge J.S.Sidhu[62] pronounced a six-month jail sentence and afine of Rs 1000 to Rathore. The sentence wassuspended until January 20, 2010.[63][7]He was granted bail minutes after the sentencing,after furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000. Rathoreswife Abha has said they will be appealing thesentence on January 4, 2010.[ 49. The case was brought up for debate in Parliament. "After 19 years, thecriminal has been found guilty but all he got as punishment was 6 months inprison. Within 10 minutes of conviction, he was out on bail. Is it not ashame for all of us?" asked CPI (M) leader Brinda Karat.[64]Former Haryana C.M Om Prakash Chautala, when asked about the case,dismissed it as a "frivolous issue". It was during his rule that Rathore waspromoted to DGP for Haryana. After the public outcry over the case,Chautala backtracked and accused the courts and the ruling CongressGovernment in Haryana of "letting Rathore off with a lightpunishment."[65] Ruchikas father has blamed Chautala for activelysupporting Rathore as he harassed his family.[66]Aradhna Parkash has started a signature drive to reopen the case. [67]However, the power of the law seems to be limited to grabbing hold of theDGP SPS Rathore, who will be stripped off his police medal. The decision totake back Rathores police medal, given to the police officer formeritorious service in August, 1985, was taken by a committee. 50. On February 8, 2010, a man, identified asUtsav Sharma, a resident of Varanasi, UttarPradesh, attacked Rathore with a pocket knifeas Rathore walked out of the court. Rathorewas rushed to a nearby hospital and theattacker was taken into custody. Televisiongrabs show Sharma stepping up and stabbingRathore in the face 2 times while missing athird stab before being over powered by thepolice. Television grabs also show a constableholding the weapon of attack with her bare 51. = TimelineAug 12, 1990: IGP Rathore molests 14-year-old Ruchika hisofficeAug 16: Formal complaint submitted to CM Hukam Singh, HomeSecyAug 17:DGP asked to investigate.Sep 3:DGP finds Rathore prima facie guilty, submits report=1991March 12: Home Minister Sampat Singh okaysdepartmental actionMarch 13: CM gives consent to the proposal.March 22: OP Chautala becomes CM for 14April 6: Presidents Rule imposed.May 28: Charge sheet against Rathore cleared 52. =1992April 6: First FIR against Ruchikas brother, lodged for cartheft.Till Sept, 1993, 11 cases of car theft lodged against Ashu.=1993Oct 23: Ashu is kept iillegal detentiofor almost two monthsDec 28: Ruchika commits suicide by consuming poisonDec 29: Ashu is released=1994April: Charges against Rathore droppedNov 4: Rathore promoted as Addl DGP=1996-99May 11, 1996: Bansi Lal becomes CM. Rathore promoted DGP 53. =1998June 5 : Rathore suspended by Bansi Lal govticonnectiowith parole of a detainee.Aug 21: HC orders CBI probe into Ruchika=1999March 3: Rathore reinstated Additional DGP by BansiLalJuly 23: Chautala becomes Chief Minister.Sep 30: Departmental inquiry exonerates RathoreOct 10: Rathore promoted DGP 54. =2000--2010Nov 16, 2000: CBI files charge sheet against RathoreiRuchika molestatiocase.Dec 5, 2000: Rathore removed as Haryana DGP. Sentoleave.March, 2002: Rathore retires from serviceDec 21, 2009: CBI special court convicts Rathore ithecase. Sentenced to six months imprisonment andfined Rs 1,000May 25, 2010 : Sentence enhanced by 18 months