The Delhi High Court on Tuesday refused to remove Additional DCP Sandeep Lamba from supervising a court-directed police inquiry, holding that his role in the probe could not be questioned solely because of a viral video showing him allegedly slapping a woman protester during the recent Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) demonstration at Jantar Mantar.
Dismissing the plea, Justice Girish Kathpalia observed that allegations against the officer in one incident did not automatically mean he would act unfairly in every case.
“Just because he was caught in some video allegedly slapping a lady, we cannot tarnish him. Are we aware of the ground realities? How the crowd would have entered the parliament and firing would have started and so many would have died?” the judge remarked, Bar and Bench reported.
Lamba was removed from protest duty at Jantar Mantar a day after a video allegedly showing him slapping a woman protester during the Cockroach Janta Party’s (CJP) ‘Chalo Sansad’ march on July 20 went viral, triggering widespread backlash.
Why was the plea filed?
The petition was filed by a 68-year-old woman who alleged that she was forcibly removed from her home during Ramadan last year and illegally detained overnight by Delhi Police. The High Court had earlier ordered an independent inquiry into her complaint.
The woman later sought the transfer of the inquiry from Lamba, arguing that she had lost faith in his impartiality after videos surfaced showing him allegedly slapping a woman during the July 20 CJP protest near Parliament.
Her counsel argued that the officer was “seen slapping a woman in broad daylight while in uniform” and that the incident had created a “grave apprehension of bias”. The petitioner also alleged that Lamba had earlier attempted to close the inquiry without recording her statement, prompting the court to direct him to do so.
Court says officer “entitled to fair process”
The High Court, however, said the officer could not be presumed to be biased merely because of the allegations arising from the protest.
“The fundamental right to protest is there but it does not extend to damaging the seat of sovereignty. Even if it was a case of overuse of power, he cannot be tarnished like this. He is also entitled to fair trial and enquiry,” the court observed, adding, “Even assuming he is ultimately held guilty, can it be assumed that he will act unfairly in every case?”
Meanwhile, Delhi Police informed the court that the inquiry into the petitioner’s complaint had already been completed, her statement had been recorded, and the report had been sent to the competent authority for a final decision.
