Rajasthan court summons Drishti IAS founder Vikas Divyakirti for derogatory remarks against judiciary

A Rajasthan court on Tuesday took cognisance of a criminal complaint filed against Drishti IAS founder Dr. Vikas Divyakirti for allegedly making derogatory and defamatory statements against judiciary and judges in a viral video [Kamlesh Mandoliya v. Vikas Divyakirti].

Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate Manmohan Chandel of Ajmer Court observed that the comments made by Divyakirti do not fall within the ambit of constitutionally protected criticism or academic freedom, but instead amount to a scandalous and intentional attack on the dignity and authority of the judicial system.

The Court said that Divyakirti used an indecent and insulting tone against the entire judiciary.

"Prima facie, the offence under Section 353(2) and Sections 356(2) and 356(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66A(B) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, appears to be made out against the accused. Hence, cognizance is hereby taken of the offences under the aforementioned sections," the Court said.

It ordered Divyakirti to appear before the Court in person on July 22 and directed the Ajmer Police to investigate the matter further.

The Court passed the order on a complaint filed by advocate Kamlesh Mandoliya who objected to a viral video titled 'IAS v/s Judge: Who is More Powerful. Best Guidance by Vikas Divyakirti sir Hindi Motivation'.

Mandoliya claimed that the statements made in the video were derogatory towards the judges and the judiciary.

As per the allegations, Divyakirti claimed that High Court judges are appointed through lobbying and not merit and that judicial power is an illusion.

“A District Judge is not a big deal… he eats alone… To become a High Court Judge, one has to lobby… distribute sweets, and still the file may not move,” Divyakirti allegedly said.

Mandoliya claimed that the content of the video insulted not only judges and lawyers but also undermined public trust in the judicial system.

He said that he was deeply hurt and felt that the dignity of the judiciary had been gravely insulted in front of thousands of viewers, especially IAS aspirants.

Meanwhile, Divyakirti denied authorship and authorisation of the video in question. He stated that he had no connection or control over the YouTube channel that uploaded the content and suggested it may have been extracted and edited by third parties without his knowledge or consent.

He further submitted that the content constituted general commentary on matters of public interest, including judicial appointments, and that no specific individual or identifiable group was targeted.

Divyakirti further argued that the video, even if attributed to him, does not amount to defamation as defined under Section 356 of the BNS since it is protected by freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

However, the Court found that the video in question was publicly available, widely circulated, and carried statements that, prima facie, mocked the judiciary in front of IAS aspirants.

It added that the tendency to defame and insult the judiciary is constantly increasing.

"Veiled threats, indecent behaviour, use of abusive language, maliciously attacking the judiciary as in the case in question, question the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, which results in distrust and doubt towards the judiciary among the general public and all this is done with the malicious intention of gaining petty fame and getting better ratings on social media. As has been done in the case in question," the Court stated.

[Read Order]