Delhi Court Staffer Cleared In Viral Video Case, Inquiry Cites Lack Of Evidence

Delhi Court

A Delhi court staffer, accused of appearing in a compromising video with a judge, has been exonerated after a formal inquiry found no proof of misconduct or immoral behaviour.

The inquiry, led by a District Judge at Tis Hazari Court acting as Inquiry Officer, submitted its report to the Principal District & Sessions Judge (HQs), Tis Hazari. The report categorically stated that the department had “failed to establish any article of charge” against the female official, identified as Ms A.

“No Immoral Act Established”

The inquiry report clearly noted, “The Department has failed to establish that the delinquent official committed any immoral act or entered into any sexual activity with her Presiding Officer or anyone else during office duty timings. No misconduct or immoral act subversive to discipline is established.”

With this, Ms A stands fully cleared of all allegations.

Defence & Proceedings

During the proceedings, Ms A was represented by Advocate Ashish Dixit, who appeared as her Defence Assistant. The report acknowledged that she was able to effectively challenge and contest the charges with his support.

One of the central reasons for the exoneration was the lack of reliable evidence regarding the alleged video. The report highlighted serious discrepancies:

The pen drive available on record differed in make, model, and capacity from those mentioned in the fact-finding report.

The expert witness who analysed the material was neither accredited under Section 79A of the IT Act nor certified in digital forensics. Under cross-examination, the expert admitted he lacked the necessary qualifications.

Several departmental witnesses conceded that they had only viewed the alleged clip on WhatsApp or social media and could not verify its authenticity. None were able to produce a copy of the video during the proceedings.

Heightened Scrutiny Required

The inquiry emphasised that allegations targeting a woman’s character demanded heightened scrutiny. Vague statements, unverified social media content, and speculative testimony could not serve as a basis for disciplinary action.

Even the department’s main witness — the judge’s orderly — admitted that he had merely seen a video online but could not confirm whether it was genuine.

On the basis of these findings, the inquiry concluded that Ms A was not guilty of any misconduct or immoral conduct. The report officially clears her of all charges, putting to rest the allegations that had cast a shadow on her professional reputation.