The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking the removal of Additional DCP (North-East) Sandeep Lamba from supervising a court-directed police inquiry, holding that allegations against an officer cannot by themselves establish bias or justify presuming guilt.

Justice Girish Kathpalia observed that any wrongdoing by the police officer must be dealt with in accordance with the law, but said the court could not presume that he would act unfairly merely because allegations had been levelled against him.

"You have to be fair. Stop discrediting the institution. Whatever that gentleman has done, he should face consequences. But that doesn't mean you take away from his supervision the entire work," the judge remarked.

Plea followed viral slap video

The petition was filed after videos purportedly showing Lamba slapping a woman during the recent Chalo Jantar Mantar protest circulated widely online.

The petitioner argued that the incident created a "reasonable apprehension of bias" because Lamba was supervising an inquiry ordered by the High Court.

Responding to the argument, Justice Kathpalia questioned whether the conduct alleged against one officer could be used to cast doubt on the entire police force.

"Entire Delhi Police today is in the dock? Then should they stop registering FIRs?" the judge asked.

'Cannot hold him guilty without trial'

The petitioner's counsel sought to draw the court's attention to subsequent developments involving Lamba, arguing that they further strengthened the apprehension of bias.

The court declined to reconsider the matter, stressing that transferring the inquiry merely because of the allegations could itself unfairly prejudice the officer.

"Now just because this person happens to be caught on some video clip allegedly slapping a lady, we cannot tarnish him... Even assuming he is ultimately held guilty, can it be assumed that he will act unfairly in every case?" Justice Kathpalia observed.

The judge added that removing Lamba from the inquiry on that basis would effectively amount to finding him guilty without a trial.

"If I transfer the inquiry on this ground... am I not tarnishing him? Am I not holding him guilty without trial? You are precisely casting aspersions by saying a person is biased. He also has a right to a fair trial," the court said.

Police say inquiry already completed

At the beginning of the hearing, Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Delhi Police told the court that the inquiry had already been completed.

The petitioner's statement had been recorded and the inquiry report had been sent to the competent authority for further action, the court was informed.

Taking note of the submission, the High Court held that the petition had become infructuous and dismissed it.

Case originated from 2025 detention allegation

The matter originated from an earlier petition in which the petitioner alleged that she had been illegally detained at Jafrabad Police Station on the intervening night of March 24 and 25, 2025.

The High Court subsequently ordered a police inquiry into her allegations.

The petitioner later challenged the manner in which the probe was conducted, alleging that it had initially been concluded without recording her statement or examining crucial aspects of her complaint.

After the High Court directed that her statement be recorded before the inquiry was finalised, she approached the court again, seeking that the investigation be taken out of Lamba's administrative supervision and assigned to a DCP posted outside North-East Delhi.

The petitioner maintained that she was not asking the court to determine the allegations against Lamba, but argued that the appearance of impartiality was equally important in a court-monitored inquiry.