The Delhi High Court declined to transfer a court-directed police inquiry from the supervision of Additional DCP (North-East) Sandeep Lamba, holding that allegations arising from a viral video could not, by themselves, justify an assumption that the officer would act unfairly in every matter entrusted to him.
Justice Girish Kathpalia dismissed the plea after noting that the inquiry had already been completed and the report had been forwarded to the competent authority, leaving nothing further for the Court to decide.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Zarnigar Fatima, who alleged that she was forcibly removed from her residence during Ramadan in March 2025 and unlawfully detained overnight at Police Station Jafrabad. Earlier, the High Court had directed an independent police inquiry and ordered preservation of CCTV footage from the police station.
The petitioner later claimed that the inquiry had initially been proposed to be closed without recording her statement. Acting on her grievance, the Court directed that her statement be recorded before the inquiry was concluded. Her statement was subsequently recorded.
Later, after reports and videos surfaced showing Additional DCP Sandeep Lamba allegedly slapping a woman during protests at Jantar Mantar, the petitioner sought transfer of the inquiry, expressing apprehension that the officer could not conduct a fair investigation.
Court's Observations
During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel argued that the officer's alleged conduct had created a reasonable apprehension of bias.
Justice Kathpalia, however, observed that an officer could not be presumed biased merely because allegations had surfaced against him.
The Court remarked,
"Just because he was caught in some video allegedly slapping a lady, we cannot tarnish him. Are we aware of the ground realities?"
The judge further noted that even if an officer is ultimately found to have exceeded his authority in another incident, that alone does not mean every investigation under his supervision would be unfair.
Emphasising institutional fairness, the Court observed,
"He is also entitled to a fair trial and enquiry. Does that mean in every case he will be biased? Stop discrediting the institution."
Delhi Police's Submission
Appearing before the Court, the Delhi Police informed the bench that the inquiry had already been completed, the petitioner's statement had been recorded, and the inquiry report had been forwarded to the competent authority for an appropriate decision. The petitioner would be informed once that decision was taken.
Court's Decision
Accepting the submission made on behalf of the Delhi Police, Justice Girish Kathpalia held that no further issue survived for consideration.
The Court concluded,
"Considering the statements... the present petition is held infructuous. Dismissed."
