Chandigarh, January 25
Haryana’s former Director-General of Police SPS Rathore will not be caught unawares in the Ruchika molestation and suicide case.
Taking up two of his petitions for anticipatory bails in connection with fresh FIRs registered on the basis of Ruchika’s brother and father’s complaints, Justice Sabina of the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted him interim protection against arrest.
In the third abetment to suicide case, Justice Sabina directed the issuance of a four-day advance notice, in case the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) felt necessary, during the course of investigation, to arrest him.
The CBI was also given the go-ahead to investigate the abetment case, but was restrained from filing the final report. The direction followed CBI’s refusal to give a clear undertaking against using “coercive methods”. The abetment case has also been referred to a Division Bench for adjudication.
All three matters now stand adjourned to February 15. The directions are being seen as a “major relief” to Rathore, as he
was facing the threat of arrest ever since the registration of fresh cases. The anticipatory bail pleas were initially taken up around 11 am, but Rathore’s wife-cum-counsel Abha Rathore sought directions for “passing over” the cases till the “end of the list” to get adequate time to argue the matters.
As the cases were again taken up around 12 noon, Assistant Solicitor-General Anmol Rattan Sidhu sought three weeks for filing a reply to Rathore’s petition for quashing the abetment case. Reacting to the assertion, senior advocate Randip Singh Rai - appearing on Rathore’s behalf - said in these circumstances the CBI should be asked not to take any coercive steps. Rai added Rathore was willing to join the investigations as and when called.
He said the very genesis of the FIR was under challenge, and it would be unjust if the CBI was to take coercive steps. He added the matter stood adjudicated right up to the Supreme Court.
After hearing Rai and Sidhu, Justice Sabina verbally observed since the matter in question was of importance, the petition was admitted to a Division Bench. Justice Sabina also quizzed the CBI on the use of coercive methods, to which Sidhu said the agency was known for not using such methods. But in case of apprehension, Rathore could file an anticipatory bail plea.
Sidhu reiterated Rathore might use influence and tamper with evidence. He said “co-operation was unknown in the history of Rathore case”. As the other two cases were taken up, Sidhu said the CBI so far had reproduced the FIRs registered by the Panchkula police. They were still to go further deep. “We have to dig things out of an ocean,” he claimed.
Replying to Justice Sabina’s query on need to arrest him, he said the notices would demolish both cases. After the conclusion of arguments, Justice Sabina observed counsel for the CBI required further time to complete investigations. Counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, submitted Rathore was ready to join investigations. In the meantime, in the event of his arrest, Rathore be admitted to interim bail.
