He can't be tarnished: Delhi HC on DCP Sandeep Lamba who slapped woman protestor at Jantar Mantar

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday refused to entertain a plea to withdraw a 2025 case involving allegations of police excesses from the supervision of Additional DCP Sandeep Lamba, who was recently seen in a viral video slapping a woman during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protests..Justice Girish Kathpalia questioned whether the police officer’s reputation should be tarnished solely on the basis of such a video, adding that most people are not aware of the ground realities during large demonstrations. “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..Just because he was caught in some video allegedly slapping a lady, we cannot tarnish him.Delhi High Court.The Court was hearing a plea by a 68-year-old woman who claimed that she was forcibly removed from her house during Ramadan last year and illegally detained for a night by the police. The petitioner expressed that she had lost faith in Lamba’s ability to carry out a fair probe into the complaint lodged by her. Her plea recounted that the inquiry was preceded by the High Court’s directive for an independent inquiry and the preservation of CCTV footage at the police station in which she was detained. She further alleged that Lamba had earlier issued a communication indicating that the probe is being closed, without recording her statement. This turn of events led the petitioner to file a plea challenging Lamba’s communication note. As a result, the Court directed Lamba to record the petitioner’s statement before the inquiry is closed. Following this, the petitioner’s statement was also recorded on July 13. .However, the petitioner later came across reports of Lamba slapping a woman protestor during the Jantar Mantar protests. She contended that such conduct has raised serious doubts about Lamba’s impartiality. She, therefore, sought a transfer of the case lodged on her complaint to another senior officer. During today’s hearing, the petitioner's counsel submitted that Lamba was seen "violating a woman” by slapping her during the Jantar Mantar protests. “He is seen slapping a woman in broad daylight while in uniform and subsequently administrative action has been taken,” the petitioner’s counsel added. Advocate M Sufian Siddiqui appearing for the senior citizen stated,“The supervening circumstances when cumulatively considered with the past background has given rise to grave apprehension of bias in the mind of the petitioner. My respectful submission is that in the light of the supervening circumstance, wherein the inquiry officer himself is found guilty of violating a woman's right. Please appreciate initially how in what manner the inquiry was closed without recording the statement of the petition who was the victim.”.However, the Court observed that Lamba cannot be presumed to be biased in every case he is entrusted to handle only on account of the recent allegations. "The fundamental right to protest is there but it does not extend to damaging the seat of sovereignty. How he has tackled the crowd - 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. Does that mean in every case he will be biased? You have to be very fair. Stop discrediting the institution," the Court said..How he has tackled the crowd - even if it was a case of overuse of power - he cannot be tarnished like this.Delhi High Court .Meanwhile, the Delhi Police informed the Court that the inquiry in the petitioner’s case had already been completed and that her statement had been recorded. It further submitted that Lamba had transmitted the inquiry report to the competent authority for a final decision, which would be communicated to the petitioner.Taking note of this submission, the Court held that nothing survived for consideration. "Considering the statement of ASC, the petition is held infructuous and dismissed," the Court said..Advocates Sufian Siddiqui, Rakesh Bhugra, Niyazuddin and Mohammad Mazhar Ahmed Advocates from Global Law Chambers represented the petitioner.