Chandigarh, December 30
While the public uproar over the way the then Haryana government protected top cop SPS Rathore --- accused of molesting a budding tennis player, Ruchika Girhotra --- refuses to die down, a similar case has come to light, this time in the forest department.

There are many similarities in the two cases. In both incidents, instead of registering FIRs, the government decided to proceed departmentally against the officers and after the probe substantiated the allegations, it did not take disciplinary action to its logical conclusion. A strange plea was taken in both cases that since the incidents took place long back, the registration of a criminal case was not justified. Apart from the accused officers getting promoted, both incidents happened in the 1990s and in Panchkula. Also, the accused occupied senior posts in their respective departments.

In both cases, a third party came forward to seek justice for the victims. If in the Ruchika case, it was Aradhana and her parents, in the forest department case, a retired associate professor of the Haryana Agriculture University, Dr Ram Kumar, took up the issue with the National Commission for Women.

A woman clerk (name withheld) working in the office of Panchkula Conservator of Forests alleged in writing that the then Conservator of Forests, Panchkula, KL Manhas, outraged her modesty in the office by “pulling her towards him and seeking a kiss” on May 6, 1994.

When contacted, Manhas denied the allegation and described it as “motivated”. While her complaint was being “processed”, she was transferred from Panchkula to Gurgaon. It was only on November 17, 1995, that the Chief Secretary ordered an inquiry into the complaint by the Vigilance Bureau.

The inquiry officer DSP Sadhu Singh held that the statement of the complainant “cannot be treated to be false.” However, recommending that “stern departmental proceedings may be initiated against Manhas”, Sadhu Singh said: “The registration of the case at this stage is not justified.”

After seeking an explanation from Manhas, the government chargesheeted him in 1999. The chargesheet was issued by the then Secretary, Forest Department, Deepa Jain Singh, who observed that the plea taken by the officer that he was on tour on the day of the alleged incident was “an afterthought”. The chargesheet was issued under Rule 8 (major penalty) of the Indian Administrative Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969.

However, Om Prakash Chautala of the INLD became the Chief Minister in July 1999.

Deepa Jain Singh was replaced by BD Dhalia. On November 26, 1999, Dhalia conveyed to Manhas that “after investigating the matter and keeping in mind all the relevant facts, the government has decided to warn him to be careful in future.”

Within a month, Dhalia issued another order saying that “after scrutinising the matter and keeping into mind all the facts, the government has decided to drop (close) the issue, but with this Manhas is ‘advised’ to be careful in future so that this kind of complaint is not repeated.”

It is strange that though the government “dropped the issue”, yet it chose to “advise” the officer to be careful. Manhas said since he was a hard taskmaster, certain colleagues and subordinates of him had always been trying to harm him. He said whenever his promotion was due, some baseless allegations was levelled against him. When the complaint was made, at that time also his promotion was due. Even now, he said, his promotion was due.

When contacted, Dr Ram Kumar said he was encouraged to write to the National Commission for Women after seeing its role in the Ruchika case. He denied that his complaint was motivated.