Rejecting the anticipatory bail plea of S P S Rathore in Ruchika molestation case, a local court today said the former Haryana director general of police was not entitled for the concession since allegations levelled against him in both the first information reports were specific and cast a spine-chilling and hair raising impact.
"The applicant-accused cannot be entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail, especially in the circumstances when specific allegations in categorical terms have been levelled in both the FIRs," Additional District and Sessions Judge Sanjiv Jindal said in his order.
The two FIRs disclose the "alleged commission of the non-bailable offences on his (Rathore) party, which not only prick the conscience of common man, but also cast a spine-chilling and hair raising impact on one's psyche", he said.
He said the complainants --Ruchika's father Subhash Chander Girhotra and brother Ashu -- were subjected to "inhuman torture" at the behest of the applicant-accused on account of his alleged political clout and high official position in the official machinery of the state.
Subhash Chander Girhotra and his son Ashu had filed two complaints against Rathore and others in connection with the postmortem proceedings and booking of her brother in false cases demanding registration of fresh FIRs.
The complaint said the inquest proceedings conducted by the Sector 6 police station at the PGI in Chandigarh, where Ruchika was taken after she attempted suicide on December 28, 1993, and died the following day, was without any jurisdiction as the Haryana police had no locus standi to conduct the proceedings in Chandigarh, which is a Union Territory. The police party from Panchkula in Haryana went to the PGI in Chandigarh and conducted the inquest proceedings and got the postmortem done, the complaint said.
Ashu in his complaint said that seven FIRs for different offences, including auto theft, were registered against him in a bid to victimize him after the molestation of his sister.
Sixty-seven year old Rathore and Assistant Sub Inspector Sewa Singh had moved the applications seeking anticipatory bail following the registration of the two FIRs on December 29.
"This court also finds merit in the contentions raised by the learned counsel of the complainant that since the criminal conspiracies were not hatched sitting in the drawing rooms in the presence of the witnesses so the same can be unearthed only through the custodial interrogation of the accused", the Judge said in his order.
Considering the fact that the applicant was an Indian Police Service officer who held high positions throughout his service, including that of the DGP and had considerable political clout, the possibility of tampering with evidence and intimidating the witnesses directly or indirectly can not be ruled out, he said.
The court also noted that the conduct of the state of Haryana in not filing the reply to the present bail applications and seeking adjournment of sufficient time for filing the reply despite availing six days' time, "gives a clear cut impression that either the law officers and police officers of the state are incompetent or they are intentionally dilly-dallying the matter".
