Sexually Explicit Video of District Judge: Delhi Court Staffer Cleared as Inquiry Finds It Unverified
A Delhi Court, in a departmental; inquiry of a staffer, identified only as “Ms A” in the report, of all misconduct charges arising from a viral video allegedly showing her in a compromising situation with a judge.
It is to be noted that on March 9, 2022, an sexually explicit video, wherein a District Judge was seen in a compromising position with staff in his chamber, had been circulated on various social media platforms and web portals.
The Inquiry Officer, a District Judge Ajay Pandey of the Tis Hazari Courts, submitted the report to the Principal District & Sessions Judge (HQs), Tis Hazari, concluding the department “failed to establish any article of charge” against the woman.
The inquiry found no evidence that Ms A “committed any immoral act or entered into any sexual activity with her Presiding Officer or anyone else during office duty timings,” and recorded that there was “no misconduct or immoral act subversive to discipline.” The report emphasised that allegations affecting a woman’s character require heightened scrutiny, and said vague or hearsay testimony could not support disciplinary proceedings.
The report flagged critical doubts about the provenance and reliability of the digital evidence relied upon by the department. Investigators found discrepancies in the pen drives referenced: the device on record differed in make, model and capacity from those mentioned in the fact-finding materials. Further, the expert who examined the footage was not accredited under Section 79A of the IT Act and was not certified in digital forensics; the expert conceded under cross-examination that he lacked requisite qualifications.
Several departmental witnesses told the inquiry they had only seen the clip on WhatsApp or other social media and could not confirm its authenticity. Not one witness produced an original copy of the clip during inquiry proceedings. Even the department’s principal witness; the judge’s orderly, said he had seen a clip online but was unsure whether it was genuine. Those factual gaps weighed heavily in the Inquiry Officer’s conclusion that charges could not be sustained.
Ms A was represented in the inquiry by Advocate Ashish Dixit, who appeared as her Defence Assistant; the report records that with his assistance she was able to effectively contest the allegations. On that basis the inquiry formally exonerated Ms A and recorded that she was “fully cleared of all charges.”
Context and implications: the video at the centre of the probe reportedly went viral in 2022; the inquiry’s findings highlight two recurring lessons for institutions and investigators, (1) the importance of proper chain-of-custody and certified digital-forensics analysis before initiating disciplinary action based on online material, and (2) the need for caution when allegations impugn an individual’s sexual morality, given the risk of reputational harm from unverified social-media content.
No orders on departmental or administrative follow-up are recorded in the inquiry report made public; the submission has been placed before the Principal District & Sessions Judge (HQs) for further administrative action, if any.
"It is held that the Department has failed to establish any Article of Charge against the Delinquent Official Ms. A and she is entitled for exoneration from all the charges alleged during this inquiry. Report is submitted accordingly to Worthy Disciplinary Authority, learned Principal District & Sessions Judge (HQs), Tsi Hazari, Delhi. Complete inquiry file along with this report is being sent back ot the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge (HQs), Tis Hazari, Delhi through a forwarding letter," the report reads.
Notably, in February 2023, the Delhi High Court had directed the social media platforms namely WhatsApp, Twitter, and Youtube to take down all URLs, posts, or images related to the offending video of a district judge. The High Court was hearing a suit seeking a permanent injunction prohibiting the defendants, their associates, sister companies, agents, and others from publishing/re-publishing/telecasting, in any way, a purported video of March 9, 2022, that was being circulating on various social media platforms and web portals since 29 November 2022.
The single-judge bench had made the observation, keeping in mind the sexually explicit nature of the video's contents and the imminent, grave, and irreparable harm that was likely to be caused to the plaintiff's privacy rights. The suit was taken on urgent mentioning. On examining the content of the complaint, the Court had stated that Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as well as Section 67A of the Information and Technology Act, 2000, would have been violated if further circulation, sharing, and distribution of the video was permitted. Justice Yashwant Varma was of the opinion that the content distributed to parties and users of the defendants' services, appeared to violate the Legally Acceptable Terms of Use as adopted by them.
Additionally, the Court had noted that the full court itself had taken administrative cognizance of the incident, and in accordance with the Resolution passed on 29 November 2022, the Registrar General of the Court had conveyed to defendant No.5 (Union) the need to take appropriate action for blocking the said video across all ISPs, messaging platforms, and social media platforms.
Report Title: Department v. Ms. A
Bench: District Judge Ajay Pandey (Inquiry Officer)