An Ajmer court has taken cognizance of a criminal complaint against Dr. Vikas Divyakirti, founder of Drishti IAS, for allegedly making offensive and defamatory statements against the Indian judiciary in a video that has gone viral on social media platforms.
The case was brought before Shri Manmohan Chandel, Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer, who noted that the statements made by the accused did not fall within the permissible boundaries of constitutional criticism or academic discussion. Rather, the court opined that the remarks amounted to a deliberate and scandalous denigration of the judicial institution and its officers.
The complaint was initiated by Advocate Kamlesh Mandoliya, who referred to a video titled “IAS vs. Judge: Who is More Powerful – Best Guidance by Vikas Divyakirti Sir”. In the video, it is alleged that Dr. Divyakirti made disparaging statements, such as, “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.”
The complainant asserted that such comments are not only demeaning to judges and legal professionals but also erode public faith in the justice delivery system, which is a critical pillar of the Constitution.
Upon examining the contents of the video and the accompanying allegations, the court held that prima facie, the offences under Sections 353(2), 356(2), and 356(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66A(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, are attracted. Consequently, the court took cognizance of the complaint and summoned Dr. Divyakirti to appear in person on July 22, 2025.
In a strongly worded observation, the court expressed concern over the increasing misuse of digital platforms to propagate unverified and derogatory content against constitutional authorities. “Targeted attacks, use of disrespectful language, and vilification of the judiciary for garnering online attention reflects an alarming trend that threatens the very sanctity and impartiality of the judicial process,” the court remarked.
Responding to the complaint, Dr. Divyakirti denied any involvement in the creation or publication of the video. He contended that he does not control the YouTube channel where the video appeared and suggested that the footage might have been altered or uploaded without his consent. He also argued that even if the statements were attributed to him, they formed part of general commentary protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the freedom of speech and expression.
However, the court held that such protection does not extend to statements that cross the threshold of fair criticism and venture into the realm of intentional defamation and public mischief. It observed that such remarks have the potential to diminish the credibility of the judiciary in the eyes of the public, thereby undermining the rule of law.
The matter is now slated for further hearing on July 22, with directions issued to the Ajmer Police to conduct a detailed investigation into the incident and submit a report.
.png)
.png)
.png)
