Leak of Investigative Videos on Social Media Raises Alarming Questions About Police Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Summons Chandigarh DGP

“Reply is vague, evasive, and silent on core issues… This raises serious concern about the functioning of the Chandigarh Police”, In a scathing order issued on 21 May 2025, the Punjab & Haryana High Court, in Prakash Singh Marwah v. Union of India & Others, CWP No. 9388 of 2025, summoned the Director General of Police, Chandigarh, to appear in person on 22 May 2025, after the police failed to identify who uploaded a sensitive investigation video on social media.

Justice Kuldeep Tiwari, expressing grave dissatisfaction with the affidavit filed by the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), U.T. Chandigarh, stated that the police reply was vague and evasive, and failed to answer even the basic judicial queries directed in a previous order dated 3 April 2025.

“Strangely enough, as of today, the Senior Superintendent of Police, U.T., Chandigarh could not lay hands on any material as to who had uploaded the video clip in question on social media platform(s).”

Court Questions Use of Official WhatsApp Group for Circulating Investigative Content

The matter arose from a viral videographed content of an investigation being circulated online. The Court had specifically asked the police to disclose:

• Who uploaded the video online

• Whether the act was done in official capacity

• Whether there were any governing guidelines in place

The reply filed on 20 May 2025, via affidavit of Ms. Kanwardeep Kaur, IPS, SSP Chandigarh, revealed that Constable Yogesh had shared the video in an official WhatsApp group, but the police were still “in the process of ascertaining the source of leakage.”

The Court took a dim view of this explanation:

“Even if the stand is considered, the reply does not disclose in which capacity and under which official guidelines/instructions such a WhatsApp group was created…”

“Sensitive information regarding investigations is being uploaded therein and accepted as part of practice by the Chandigarh Police—this raises serious concern about its functioning.”

“Was the Constable’s Phone Seized?”—Court Appalled to Hear Negative Response

In a dramatic moment in court, Justice Tiwari posed a direct query to the Additional Public Prosecutor: Had the mobile phone of Constable Yogesh been confiscated and sent for forensic analysis?

The answer was a stark “No.”

“This Court posed another specific query… to which the latter answered in negative.”

“When despite specific directions… a totally vague and silent reply has been furnished, especially when the case at hand involves serious concern regarding functioning of the Chandigarh Police…”

Personal Appearance of DGP Ordered—“No Adjournments Will Be Entertained”

Considering the gravity of the issue and the unsatisfactory police response, the High Court ordered:

“This Court deems it appropriate to direct the Director General of Police, Chandigarh, to cause his personal appearance before this Court on 22.05.2025 at 10:00 a.m.”

The Court further clarified that no delay tactics would be tolerated:

“It is made clear that on the subsequent date of hearing, no request for adjournment would be entertained on behalf of either side.”

This development highlights growing judicial intolerance towards institutional opacity in sensitive criminal investigations, especially when confidential material leaks into the public domain. The High Court’s firm stance underscores that law enforcement bodies must be held accountable for digital and procedural integrity in criminal probes.

“Such acts of evasion in the face of judicial queries corrode public trust in institutional systems… Accountability must not stop at the constable level.”

Date of Order: 21 May 2025