2. Jessica lal
murder case

4.  Jessica Lal
1965-1999Born5 January 1965
IndiaDied30 April 1999 (aged 34)
New DelhiOccupationModelJessica
Lal (1965–1999) was a model in New Delhi,
who was working as a celebrity barmaid at a
crowded socialite party when she was shot
dead at around 2 am on 30 April 1999.
Dozens of witnesses pointed to Siddharth
Vashisht, also known as Manu Sharma, the
son of Venod Sharma, a wealthy and
influential Congress-nominated Member of
Parliament from Haryana, as the murderer.

5. In the ensuing trial, Manu Sharma and a
number of others were acquitted on 21
February 2006.
Following intense media and public
pressure, the prosecution appealed and
the Delhi High Court conducted
proceedings on a fast track with daily
hearings conducted over 25 days. The
trial court judgment was overturned, and
Manu Sharma was found guilty of having
murdered Lal. He was sentenced to life

6. On 29 April 1999, Jessica Lal was one of several models
working an unlicensed bar at a party in the Tamarind Court,
which was within the Qutub Colonnade, a refurbished palace
overlooking theQutub Minar in Mehrauli. By midnight the bar
had run out of liquor and it would in any event have ceased
sales at 12.30 am. At 2 am Lal refused to serve Manu Sharma,
who was with a group of three friends, despite him offering
her 1000 Rupees. Sharma then produced a .22 pistol and fired
it twice: the first bullet hit the ceiling and the second hit Lal
in the head and killed her.[1][2][3]
A mêlee followed the shooting, during which Sharma and his
friends — Amardeep Singh Gill, Vikas Yadav, and Alok
Khanna — left the scene.[1] Thereafter, it was reported that
contact could not be made with Sharma's family, including his
mother, and that they were "absconding".[4] After eluding
police 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

7. The case by now involved several prominent people. Sharma
himself was the son of Venod Sharma, who at the time of the
shooting was a former minister of the national government and
by the time of the subsequent trial was a minister in
the Haryana state government. Yadav was the son of another
state politician, D. P. Yadav. Bina Ramani, who had redeveloped
the premises where the party took place, was a socialite and
fashion designer who allegedly had contacts in high places and
whose daughter knew Lal as a fellow-model. Singh managed the
distribution of Coca-Colain Chandigarh.[5]
Amit Jhigan, an accomplice of Sharma, was arrested on 8 May
and charged with conspiring to destroy evidence, as it was
believed that he had retrieved the pistol from its original
hiding place near to the club. While he was remanded in
custody, Yadav was still at large and it had also proved
impossible to locate his father, who had promised to deliver
his son to the police.[3]

8. It had by now become clear that the party, which
was claimed to be a farewell function for Ramani's
husband, George Mailhot, had in fact been open to
anyone willing to pay. Ramani, her husband, and her
daughter Malini were arrested on the same day as
Jhigan. They were charged with operating an illegal
bar and, although released on bail, had to
surrender their passports. There were several
lines of inquiry regarding the family, including
whether or not Ramani — a UK national — had the
necessary permits to operate a business in India.
Another concern was to establish whether or not
she had concealed evidence by ordering the
cleaning up of blood at the premises, although by
19 May it had been announced that charges relating

9. Yadav presented himself to Delhi police on 19 May
but was able immediately to leave because he had
acquired anticipatory bail papers. He claimed to have
been in Bombay and elsewhere during the previous
few weeks, and refused to comment regarding
whether he had been in contact with his father. He
admitted that Sharma had stayed with him on the
night of the murder but denied being present himself
at the Tamarind Club or having any knowledge of the
events that had occurred there until the next day,
when he told Sharma to surrender to the police. A
complex legal situation involving his paperwork meant
that the police did not arrest Yadav at that
time.[6] Subsequently, he had short spells in custody
and longer periods when he was freed on bail, with
decisions and overturnings of them being made in

10. sheets were filed with the court on 3 August
1999. Sharma was charged with murder,
destruction of evidence and other offences,
while Khanna, Gill and Yadav faced lesser
charges, including destruction of evidence,
conspiracy and harbouring a suspeCharge ct.
Others similarly charged were Shyam Sunder
Sharma, Amit Jhingan, Yograj Singh,
Harvinder Chopra, Vikas Gill, Raja Chopra,
Ravinder Krishan Sudan and Dhanraj. The last
three named had not at that time been

11. According to the BBC, India has a "snail-paced
judicial system" and its conviction rate is below
30%.[9] Seven years after the case was opened, on
21 February 2006, nine of the twelve accused
were acquitted, including Sharma. Jhingan had
already been discharged and both Ravinder Kishan
Sudan and Dhanraj, were still at large. The
prosecution had been affected by 32 of their
witnesses becoming "hostile". These
included Shayan Munshi, Andleeb Sehgal, Karan
Rajput, Shiv Lal Yadav and two ballistics experts,
Roop Singh and Prem Sagar. Subsequently, in
February 2011, it was announced that all 32 would
be facing charges for perjury.[10][11]

12. the trial judge commented after the
outcome that
the two cartridges, emptied shells of
which were recoverThe court has
acquitted them because the Delhi
police failed to sustain the grounds
on which they had built up their case.
The police failed to recover the
weapon which was used to fire at
Jessica Lal as well as prove their
theory that ed from the spot, were
[11]

13. The Hindu newspaper also reported that the
judge was aware that the prosecution was not
assisted by the hostility of their witnesses, three
of whom had seen the shooting, and by the fact
that forensic examination contradicted police
claims that two cartridges found at the scene were
fired from the same weapon. Finally, the judge
believed that the police had failed to provide a
sufficient explanation of the chain of events which
led up to the killing.[11]

14. Reaction to acquittal
The reaction to the verdict was one of outcry.
The New York Times described the situation a
fortnight later
Most noticeably among India's urban
middle class, the acquittal has released a
pent-up frustration with an often
blundering and corrupt law enforcement
bureaucracy and a deep disgust with the
rich and famous who, by all appearances,
manipulated it to their advantage.[12]

15. There were numerous protest
campaigns, including ones
involving SMS and email, seeking to
obtain redress for the perceived
miscarriage of justice. Rallies and
marches took place, as well as
candelit vigils.[12]
V. N. Khare, a former Chief Justice
of India, implicitly criticised the trial
judge, saying that it should have been

16. Sometimes when the police, the prosecution
and the lawyers all have connections with the
criminals, the judge should be slightly
proactive. He should try to get to the truth,
and not depend totally on the evidence
provided in court. In a case like this, he is not
going to get proper evidence. Mostly the
judiciary is depended on the evidence provided
by the investigative agencies, but now when
the situation is so bad, the judges have to
wake up, be proactive and find the truth.[9]
The Delhi police commissioner announced an
investigation to determine where things had gone
wrong, and said that among other things it would
examine whether there had been a conspiracy,

17. The police petitioned the High Court for
a review of the case and on 22 March
2006 the court issued warrants against
the nine defendants who had stood trial.
Eight of them were subsequently bailed in
April, with restrictions imposed on their
ability to leave the country. The ninth
defendant, Gill, had not been traced since
the original issue of warrants in March.[13]

18. On 9 September 2006, a sting
operation by the news
magazine Tehelka was shown on the
TV channel STAR News. This appeared
to show that witnesses had been
bribed and coerced into retracting
their initial testimony. Venod Sharma
was named in the exposé as one who
had paid money to some of the
witnesses.[14] Facing pressure from
the central Congress leaders, Venod

19. Judgement
On 15 December 2006, the High Court ruled that
Sharma was guilty based on existing evidence, and also
criticised the trial judge, S. L. Bhayana.[15]
The judgement said that the lower court had been lax
in not considering the testimony of witnesses such as
Bina Ramani and Deepak Bhojwani, stating regarding
the treatment of the latter's evidence that
With very great respect to the learned judge
[Bhayana], we point out that this manner of testing
the credibility of the witness is hardly a rule of
appreciation of evidence. ... Obviously, this reflects
total lack of application of mind and suggests a hasty
approach towards securing a particular end, namely

20. In particular, the key witness Munshi came in
for serious criticism. The judgement says, of
his earlier repudiation of the First
Information Report that "[Munshi] is now
claiming that the said statement was recorded
in Hindi while he had narrated the whole story
in English as he did not know Hindi at all ... We
do not find this explanation of Munshi to be
convincing." Regarding Munshi's testimony that
two guns were involved, the judgement says:
"In court he has taken a somersault and came
out with a version that there were two
gentlemen at the bar counter. ... [W]e have no

21. On 20 December 2006, Sharma was punished
with a sentence of life imprisonment and a
fine. The other accused, Yadav and Gill, were
fined and given four years' rigorous
imprisonment. A plea for Sharma to be
sentenced to death was rejected on the
grounds that the murder, although intentional,
was not premeditated and Sharma was not
considered to be a threat to society.[16]
Sharma's lawyer announced that the decision
would be appealed in Supreme Court because
the judgement was wrong in holding Bina
Ramani to be a witness.[1

22. On 24 September 2009, the government in
Delhi paroled Sharma for a 30 day period so
that he could attend to some matters relating
to his sick mother and the family
business. [17] The parole was extended by
further 30 days, during which he was seen to
be partying in a night-club and his mother
undertook public functions.[18]
Sharma returned himself to Tihar jail on 10
November 2009, two weeks before his parole
expired.[18]

23. Supreme the Supreme Court of India of
On 19 April 2010,
Court confirmation
sentences
approved the sentences and said that
The evidence regarding the actual incident, the
testimonies of witnesses, the evidence connecting the
vehicles and cartridges to the accused — Manu
Sharma, as well as his conduct after the incident
prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The High
Court has analysed all the evidence and arrived at the
correct conclusion.[19]
Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, who represented
Sharma in the Supreme Court, assailed the High Court
verdict, alleging that the media had prejudged the
issue and conducted a campaign to vilify his client. The
Supreme Court accepted that there had been an
element of "trial by media" but believed that it had

26. The Ruchika Girhotra Case involves the molestation of 14-year-old
Ruchika Girhotra in 1990 by the Inspector General of Police Shambhu
Pratap Singh Rathore (S.P.S. Rathore) in Haryana, India. After she made
a complaint, the victim, her family, and her friends were systematically
harassed by the police leading to her eventual suicide. On December 22,
2009, after 19 years, 40 adjournments, and more than 400 hearings, the
court finally pronounced Rathore guilty under Section
354 IPC (molestation) and sentenced him to six months imprisonment and
a fine of Rs 1,000. The CBI had opposed Rathore's plea and had sought an
enhancement of his sentence from six months to the maximum of two
years after his conviction. Rejecting his appeal against his conviction by a
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) special court, Chandigarh District
Court on May 25 sentenced the disgraced former police official to one
and a half years of rigorous imprisonment, enhancing his earlier six-month
sentence and immediately taken into custody and taken to the Burail
prison.[1][2] On 11 November 2010, the Supreme Court granted bail to S P

27. Ruchika Girhotra was a student in Class X A (Batch of
1991) at Sacred Heart School for Girls in Chandigarh.
Her father, S.C Girhotra, was a manager with UCO
Bank. Her mother died when she was ten years
old.[3][4] She had one brother, Ashu.
Ruchika, along with her friend Aradhna Prakash, was
enrolled as a trainee at the Haryana Lawn Tennis
Association (HLTA).[5]
Aradhna's parents Anand and Madhu Prakash
attended over 400 hearings, after Ruchika's father
and brother had to leave Panchkula due to
harassment. Supreme Court lawyers Pankaj Bhardwaj
and Meet Malhotra fought the case for free since
1996.[5][6]

28. Born in 1941 and a 1966-Batch Indian Police
Service officer of the Haryana Cadre, Rathore
was on deputation to Bhakhra Beas
Management Board as Director, Vigilance and
Security, when he molested Ruchika. He was
the founding president of the Haryana Lawn
Tennis Association, and Rathore used the
garage of his house at 469 Sector 6,
Panchkula, as its office.[7] The house used to
have a clay tennis court behind it, built by
encroaching on government land. A few young
girls played in this court.[5] Action by local
authorities later led to the tennis court being

29. Rathore's wife Abha is an advocate. She
defended his case from the
beginning.[5] She practices law in
Panchkula and Chandigarh from her office
in Sector 6, Panchkula.[9] Ajay Jain is
another counsel for Rathore.[10]
Rathore's daughter, Priyanjali, was
Ruchika's classmate. She is now a
practising lawyer.[3] His son, Rahul, used
to practice law at the Punjab and Haryana
High Courts. He is an advocate withCox &

30. Sub-Inspector Prem Dutt and Assistant
Sub-Inspectors Sewa Singh and Jai
Narayan of the Crime Investigation
Agency (CIA) Staff Office in Mansa
Devi tortured Ashu under the directions
of Rathore.[12][13]
Sewa Singh is currently the Assistant
Station House Officer of Pinjore police
station. He has not reported for work
since the sentencing of Rathore created
national headlines.[14] He lives in Ratpur
colony in Pinjore. Ajay Jain is also serving

31. Ruchika was a promising tennis player. On August 11,
1990, Rathore visited Ruchika's house and met her
father S. C. Girhotra. As head of the Haryana Lawn
Tennis Association, Rathore promised to get special
training for Ruchika. He requested that Ruchika meet
him the following day in connection with this.[16]
On August 12 (Sunday), Ruchika, along with her friend
Aradhana (Aradhana Prakash), went to play at the lawn
tennis court and met Rathore in his office (in the
garage of his house). On seeing both of them, Rathore
asked Aradhana to call the tennis coach (Mr. Thomas)
to his room. Aradhana left, and Rathore was alone with
Ruchika. He immediately grabbed her hand and waist
and pressed his body against hers. Ruchika tried to
[16]

32. But Aradhana returned and witnessed what was going
on. On seeing her, Rathore released Ruchika and fell
back in his chair. He then asked Aradhana to go out
of his room and personally bring the coach with her.
When she refused, Rathore rebuked Aradhana loudly,
asking her to bring the coach. He insisted that
Ruchika stayed in his room, but she managed to run
out.[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 avoid
Rathore, and played till 6:30 pm. However, as they
were leaving, the ball picker, Patloo, told them
Rathore had called them to his office. It was at this

33. Following this, Panchkula residents, mostly parents of
tennis players, gathered at the residence of Anand
Prakash, father of Ruchika's friend Aradhana, and
decided that some strong action must be taken by
way of bringing up the matter with higher
authorities.
They could not contact either the Chief Minister
Hukum Singh or Home Minister Sampat Singh, but
met Home Secretary J K Duggal, who, on August 17,
1990, discussed the matter with the Home Minister
and asked DGP Ram Rakshpal Singh to
investigate.[18][19]
Rathore allegedly paid some residents of Rajiv Colony
(a slum) in Panchkula and also garnered the support of
people from his community in Naraingarh, Ambala

34. On September 3, 1990, the inquiry report
submitted by R R Singh to Home Secretary J
K Duggal indicted Rathore.[18] It recommended
that an FIR be filed immediately against
Rathore. Duggal forwarded the report to the
Home Minister Sampat Singh, who failed to
forward it to the Chief Minister for necessary
action.[21] The Home Secretary who replace
Duggal never followed up on the report.[21]
The report also revealed that an ex-
MLA, Jagjeet Singh Tikka organised a large
group of men to shout slogans in front of
Ruchika's house and harass her
family.[21] Rathore enjoyed the patronage of

35. Instead of filing an FIR as recommended by
the report, the government preferred
departmental action, and, on May 28, 1991,
issued a chargesheet against Rathore.
However, the government's legal
remembrancer, R. K. Nehru, suggested in 1992
that state government was not competent to
issue the chargesheet, insisting that an FIR be
registered. Then, the C M Bhajan Lal's office
referred the case to the chief secretary for
advice. Eventually, no action was taken.[18]
Rathore was enjoying support from all the
Chief Ministers and was using his influence and

36. On September 20, 1990, two weeks after the inquiry
indicted Rathore, Ruchika was expelled from her
school, Sacred Heart School for Girls, in Sector 26,
Chandigarh. Ruchika had studied there from Class I.
The school actively plotted against Ruchika. The
official reason for her expulsion was non-payment of
fees. The school had actually refused to accept her
fees. No notice was given to Ruchika for non-payment
of fees, as is the school's normal procedure. The
school's brochure states that non-payment of fees
can only lead to being disallowed to take exams. It is
not grounds for expulsion.[28][29]

37. late fees in 1990, at least 8 students paid their fees later
than Ruchika did, but no action was taken against them.
Ironically, the defaulters included Rathore’s daughter
Priyanjali.[30][31]
The principal of the school, Sister Sebastina, who still
occupies the office, accepted to the magisterial inquiry that
she personally issued instructions for the removal of Ruchika's
name from school register.[31]
Ruchika's expulsion from school was later used by Rathore's
lawyers to question her character.
It has been alleged that Ruchika was expelled to avoid
embarrassing Rathore's daughter Priyanjali, who was her
classmate.[32]
The school tried to stall the magisterial inquiry into Ruchika's
dismissal. Sister Sebastina only appeared before the inquiry
after five days.[31] The Chandigarh authorities threatened the
school with legal action if they continued to stall the
[7]

38. After her expulsion, Ruchika confined herself
indoors. Whenever she went out she was followed and
abused by Rathore's henchmen.[33] Rathore deployed
policemen in plainclothes in front of Ruchika's house
to keep an eye on the family.[13]
False cases of theft, murder and civil defamation
were filed against Ruchika's father and her 10-year-
old brother Ashu. Five theft cases against Ashu were
registered by Sub-Inspector Prem Dutt The cases
were filed when KP Singh was the Superintendent of
Police, Ambala. Singh has been named in an FIR filed
by Ashu.[34] Singh later provided Rathore's advocates
a statement absolving Rathore.[35] Singh is now the
Inspector General of Police (Training) in Haryana and
works at the Chandigarh Head Office.[

39. Cases were filed against Anand Parkash, his wife Madhu, and
their minor daughter Aradhana.
Anand Parkash worked as Chief Engineer in the Haryana State
Agriculture Marketing Board and had a spotless record until
this incident. Rathore then instigated more than 20 complaints
against him. He was suspended from his job for some time and
demoted to Superintendent Engineer. He was eventually given
premature retirement. He did, however, challenge the
government orders and was given relief by the court and
cleared of all the complaints.[36][37]
Aradhana, who is the sole witness in the molestation case, had
ten civil cases filed against her by Rathore. She received
abusive and threatening calls for months until she got married
and left for Australia.[36] Pankaj Bhardwaj, the lawyer who
took up Ruchika's case, was slapped with two court cases by
Rathore -a defamation case and a case for compensation.[36]

40. When Rathore was heading the vigilance team in the Haryana
State Electricity Board (HSEB), he sent special teams from
Bhiwani to raid houses of several of his
complainants.[36] Rathore also filed two cases against each of
the journalists who had reported on the matter - one criminal
and another civil - demanding compensation of Rs. 1 crore
each.[36]
On September 23, 1993, Ruchika's then 13-year-old brother,
Ashu, was picked up in the market place near his house by
police in plain clothes. They drove him in a jeep to the Crime
Investigation Agency (CIA) Staff Office in Mansa Devi.
There, he was tortured by Sub-Inspector Prem Dutt and
Assistant Sub-Inspectors Jai Narayan.[12][13]
His hands were tied on his back and he was made to bend. His
feet were tied with a weight. He was kept in this
uncomfortable position for an extended period of time.[33]
After some time, Rathore also arrived there. Ashu was then
tortured further. A roller, referred to by the police as

41. While still in illegal confinement, Ashu was taken to his house
and beaten mercilessly in front of Ruchika by Rathore.
Rathore then threatened her, saying that if she did not take
back the complaint, her father, and then she herself, would
face the same fate.[40][41] Ashu was paraded in handcuffs in his
neighbourhood.[42]
Ashu was picked up again on November 11, 1993. He was
tortured again and was unable to walk due to the beatings. He
was not given food or water for days at a stretch and was
beaten mercilessly. He was repeatedly told to convince his
sister to withdraw her complaint.[42] He was allegedly forced
to sign on blank papers, which were used by the police to show
his "confessions" that he stole 11 cars.[38] He would not be
released until after his sister's suicide.[38]
No charges were ever framed in any of these cases filed
against Ashu.[21]
The Panchkula Chief Judicial Magistrate exonerated Ashu in
1997, saying he had ―no hesitation to pinpoint that nothing is

42. Gajinder Singh, a resident of Bihar, had been
arrested by the Panchkula Police for a car theft and
police claimed he had named Ashu as his accomplices.
Singh later absconded and was named a proclaimed
offender.[43][44] He has been arrested by a team of
Haryana Police assisted by their Pune counterparts on
January 9, 2010 from the Baner Road area, where he
was running a dhaba.[45]
The Girhotra's one-kanal bungalow in Sector 6
Panchkula was forcibly sold to a lawyer working for
Rathore.[40] Ruchika's father was suspended from his
job as bank manager, on charges of alleged
corruption, after coercion from Rathore.[36] They
moved to the outskirts of Simla, and had to take up
[

43. On December 28, 1993, days after Ashu was paraded in
handcuffs in his locality,[12] Ruchika consumed poison. She died
the next day. Rathore threw a party that night to
celebrate.[47]
Rathore refused to release Ruchika's body to her father
Subash unless he signed blank sheets of paper. The blank
papers were later used by the police to establish that the
family had accepted Ruchika's forged autopsy
report.[48] Rathore also threatened to kill Ashu, who was still in
illegal police custody.[13] At this time, Ashu was allegedly
unconscious in CIA lock-up. He had been stripped naked and
beaten the previous night by drunk policemen. He was brought
back to his house, still unconscious, after Ruchika's last rites
were over.[38][39]

44. The government closed the case filed
against Rathore less than a week
after her death.[51]
Unable to bear the harassment, her
family moved out of Chandigarh.[2]
Just a few months later, Rathore was
promoted to additional DGP in
November 1994, when Bhajan Lal was
the chief minister.

45. In November 1994, Rathore was promoted. No action
was taken on the inquiry report. Anand Parkash
started trying to get copy of the report. After 3
years, he finally obtained it in 1997, and in November,
moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court. On August
21, 1998, the High Court directed the CBI to conduct
an inquiry.
In Oct 1999, the INLD government led by Om
Prakash Chautala made Rathore the police chief
(DGP) of the state.[24] His name was even
recommended for a President’s Police Medal For
Distinguished Service by the same government in
November 1999.[52] Birbal Das Dhalia, who as then

46. Shanta Kumar, who was then vice-president of
the BJP, in 2000, wrote a letter to Om
Prakash Chautala, urging him to take strict
action against Rathore in the case.
However, instead of acting on the letter,
Chautala complained to then Prime
Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee about it. Shanta
Kumar was the Minister for Consumer Affairs
in the NDA government at the time.
Chautala's Indian National Lok Dal was an
alliance partner.[54]

47. Ashu's case had reached before the HC following suo motu cognizance
taken of a media report highlighting his plight,[47] by justice Mehtab
Singh Gill on December 12, 2000. The then chief justice had referred
the matter before a division bench comprising justice N K Sodhi and
justice N K Sood.[49]
While deposing before the division bench, Ashu stated that he had
undergone inhuman treatment at the instance of Rathore and the
Panchkula police. This was his first statement since the family was
forced to leave Panchkula. At the time of making the statement, the
family was living in Sector-2, New Shimla.[49]
On December 13, 2000, the division bench voiced support for
compensation to Ashu for the harassment caused to him at the hands of
Panchkula police.[44]
Rathore filed an affidavit in 2001 denying the allegations.[33]
The HC then referred the inquiry to sessions judge Patiala. On
September 3, 2002, Ashu detailed the torture he was put through to a
Patiala Sessions Court.[33][49]

48. On August 21, 1998, the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the CBI
to conduct an inquiry.
The High Court had ordered completion of investigation of the case and
filing of chargesheet expeditiously, ―preferably within six
months‖.[55] However, more than a year passed before the CBI filed a
chargesheet.[55]
On November 16, 2000, the CBI filed a charge sheet against Rathore.
Despite the CBI chargesheet, the Chautala government allowed Rathore to
continue as police chief.[24]
The case was put to hearing in the CBI special court in Ambala from
November 17. The hearings in Ambala would continue till May 2006.[24]
The chargesheet was filed only under Section 354 (molestation). Abetment
to suicide was inexplicably not included.[55]
On October 8, 2001, counsel for Anand Parkash moved an application
demanding the addition of abetment to suicide (306 of IPC) against
Rathore. Rathore argued that Prakash had no standing to move the
court [1].

49. However, in a scathing judgment on October 23, 2001, Special CBI Judge
Jagdev Singh Dhanjal demanded that the offence be added. In his 21-page
judgement, the CBI Judge underlined witness statements, including those
of Ruchika’s father, Anand Parkash, friend Aradhana and others in adding
Section 306 (abetment) of IPC against Rathore.[56][57] Dhanjal was forced
to take premature retirement two years later.[6]
However, in February 2002, Justice K. C. Kathuria of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court dismissed the CBI court's decision to register an FIR
against Rathore for abetment to suicide, claiming the lack of a complaint
regarding harassment.[44] Justice Kathuria was a neighbour of the
Girhotras, 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 the
Haryana Lawn Tennis Association which was floated by Rathore.[6]
Justice Kathuria is now the President of the Haryana State Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission.
Incredibly, after filing the chargesheet in 2000, the CBI took 7 years to
record evidence from 16 prosecution witnesses. On the other hand, the
defence counsel took nine months to complete examination of 13 out of the
total 17 witnesses.[55]

50. Rathore tried to use his influence with the CBI. R M Singh,
who was CBI Joint Director in 1998 and retired in 2001, said
Rathore was tracking the case. Once the file arrived at
Singh's desk, he started getting frequent visits to his office
from Rathore. Rathore visited multiple times in 1998, trying to
influence the CBI to clear him on all charges. Rathore had
learnt that Singh was constructing a house in Gurgaon, and
offered to provide building materials and other assistance.
Singh also found out that Rathore had also approaced the
Investigating Officer for the case, Rajesh Ranjan, CBI's
Deputy Superintendent of Police. When he failed to influence
the officers, Rathore had the case transferred. Rathore
enjoyed access to all levels of the CBI since he was DGP.[47][58]
Ruchika's was one of the few cases heard in three subordinate
courts of three different states: Haryana, Punjab and
Chandigarh - apart from one in high court and the Supreme
Court as well. Around 15 applications were accepted in Punjab

51. For example, on January 23, 2006, Rathore moved an
application demanding transfer of trial from Ambala
CBI Special Magistrate Ritu Garg to any other court.
The application was moved when evidence of only two
prosecution witnesses was remaining. The grounds
claimed was that Rathore knew Ritu's father and that
Rathore's son Rahul was a friendly with
Ritu.[60] Surprisingly, the CBI didn’t object. In his
reply filed in February 2006, S S Lakra, the then
Additional Superintendent of Police, New Delhi, said
he did not object to the transfer, allegedly so the
case would "conclude expeditiously". The case was
then transferred to Patiala.[60] Again when the case
was at the last stage, Rathore accused the then
Special CBI Judge of Patiala, Rakesh Kumar Gupta, of
overawing the defence witnesses and scolding

52. Rathore also used other technical grounds like
demanding that the trial be videographed to cause
more delays. Ironically, he later claimed that the long
delays were grounds for a reduced sentence.[61]
On November 5, 2009, the case was transferred
from the Ambala court to CBI Chandigarh. In
December, the court closed all final arguments, gave
its verdict and on December 21, special judge J.S.
Sidhu[62] pronounced a six-month jail sentence and a
fine of Rs 1000 to Rathore. The sentence was
suspended until January 20, 2010.[63][7]
He was granted bail minutes after the sentencing,
after furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000. Rathore's
wife Abha has said they will be appealing the
sentence on January 4, 2010.[

53. The case was brought up for debate in Parliament. "After 19 years, the
criminal has been found guilty but all he got as punishment was 6 months in
prison. Within 10 minutes of conviction, he was out on bail. Is it not a
shame 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 was
promoted to DGP for Haryana. After the public outcry over the case,
Chautala backtracked and accused the courts and the ruling Congress
Government in Haryana of "letting Rathore off with a light
punishment."[65] Ruchika's father has blamed Chautala for actively
supporting 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 the
DGP SPS Rathore, who will be stripped off his police medal. The decision to
take back Rathore's police medal, given to the police officer for
meritorious service in August, 1985, was taken by a committee.

54. On February 8, 2010, a man, identified as
Utsav Sharma, a resident of Varanasi, Uttar
Pradesh, attacked Rathore with a pocket knife
as Rathore walked out of the court. Rathore
was rushed to a nearby hospital and the
attacker was taken into custody. Television
grabs show Sharma stepping up and stabbing
Rathore in the face 2 times while missing a
third stab before being over powered by the
police. Television grabs also show a constable
holding the weapon of attack with her bare

55. = Timeline
Aug 12, 1990: IGP Rathore molests 14-year-old Ruchika his
office
Aug 16: Formal complaint submitted to CM Hukam Singh, Home
Secy
Aug 17:DGP asked to investigate.
Sep 3:DGP finds Rathore prima facie guilty, submits report
=1991
March 12: Home Minister Sampat Singh okays
departmental action
March 13: CM gives consent to the proposal.
March 22: OP Chautala becomes CM for 14
April 6: President's Rule imposed.
May 28: Charge sheet against Rathore cleared

56. =1992
April 6: First FIR against Ruchika's brother, lodged for car
theft.
Till Sept, 1993, 11 cases of car theft lodged against Ashu.
=1993
Oct 23: Ashu is kept iillegal detentiofor almost two months
Dec 28: Ruchika commits suicide by consuming poison
Dec 29: Ashu is released
=1994
April: Charges against Rathore dropped
Nov 4: Rathore promoted as Addl DGP
=1996-99
May 11, 1996: Bansi Lal becomes CM. Rathore promoted DGP

57. =1998
June 5 : Rathore suspended by Bansi Lal govt
iconnectiowith parole of a detainee.
Aug 21: HC orders CBI probe into Ruchika
=1999
March 3: Rathore reinstated Additional DGP by Bansi
Lal
July 23: Chautala becomes Chief Minister.
Sep 30: Departmental inquiry exonerates Rathore
Oct 10: Rathore promoted DGP

58. =2000--2010
Nov 16, 2000: CBI files charge sheet against Rathore
iRuchika molestatiocase.
Dec 5, 2000: Rathore removed as Haryana DGP. Sent
oleave.
March, 2002: Rathore retires from service
Dec 21, 2009: CBI special court convicts Rathore ithe
case. Sentenced to six months' imprisonment and
fined Rs 1,000
May 25, 2010 : Sentence enhanced by 18 months