The Counsel submitted that that there is "danger" to her life. A CBI Special Judge in Panchkula has convicted Ram Rahim on August 25, 2017 and following which violence and arson had erupted in Panchkula and Sirsa districts of Haryana which had left 41 people dead and several others injured. Honeypreet is wanted by Haryana Police and tops the list of 43 persons in connection with incidents of violence that had followed Ram Rahim's conviction in the rape cases. On August 28, 2017, CBI Special Judge had sentenced Ram Rahim to 20 years in prison for raping two of his disciples in 2002. Honeypreet had travelled along with Rahim in the special chopper which ferried them to Rohtak from Panchkula after the conviction and she had accompanied the Dera head when he had come to the Special CBI Court on August 25, 2017.
Ram Rahim is currently lodged in Sunaria jail in Rohtak district of Haryana. Haryana Police’s several teams have travelled across the country including the Indo-Nepal border to trace Honeypreet. Delhi High Court Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar after hearing the urgent plea for Honeypreet's application sought to know from the counsel that why they are "superexcited now". The Court asked from the counsel "You must be anticipating this." Delhi High Court Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal today heard arguments on the anticipatory bail application of Honeypreet at 1400 hrs when her counsel submitted to hear the petition on an urgent basis as there is "danger" to her life.
The Counsel for Honeypreet submitted before the court that Honeypreet is a single woman with clean antecedents and is law abiding and willing to join the investigation if granted the anticipatory bail by the court. Government Counsel vehemently opposed the plea of Honeypreet's counsel and submitted before the court that the Delhi High Court is not having the jurisdiction to hear the anticipatory bail application of Honeypreet and the competent court is Punjab and Haryana High Court. He further said, 'It was a ploy to do 'forum shopping' and, by giving a wrong address of a Delhi property, she was "hoodwinking" the court.' During the arguments, the Court asked from the Honeypreet's counsel that how does the application of Honeypreet come under the jurisdiction of Delhi High Court as she is wanted in connection with a case of Haryana.
The Court asked the counsel for Honeypreet to show any document that a property in Delhi belonged to her or anyone connected to her. The court further said "First you come on jurisdiction. Why has the plea been moved here... You surrender in Delhi and we will take care.' The Counsel submitted before the court that she has a house in Delhi so this court has the jurisdiction to hear the bail application of Honeypreet and she has apprehension of being arrested. Honeypreet is seeking bail for her transit from Delhi to Haryana to join investigation in the sedition case. Counsel further submitted that she will join the investigation of the case if she is protected. The Counsel further said, “It is to humiliate me.
I am not required for custodial interrogation. If I am given protection from here, I will move to Panchkula court or the Punjab and Haryana High Court for anticipatory bail. I am not even named in the FIR. What kind of sedition charges can be there against me?" After hearing the arguments Delhi High Court Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal said "The easiest way out is that you surrender." The court rejected the anticipatory bail application of Honeypreet and observed, "She has evaded arrest and hence was not entitled to any discretionary relief. The plea was filed in Delhi to buy time and delay proceedings in Haryana." (UNI)