A Rajasthan court has taken cognizance of a criminal complaint against Drishti IAS founder Dr. Vikas Divyakirti for allegedly making derogatory and defamatory remarks against the judiciary and judges in a viral online video.
The matter came before Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate Manmohan Chandel of Ajmer, who held that the comments made by Divyakirti did not fall within the ambit of constitutionally protected criticism or academic freedom but amounted to a scandalous and intentional attack on the dignity and authority of the judicial system.
The complaint was filed by advocate Kamlesh Mandoliya, who pointed to the viral video titled ‘IAS v/s Judge: Who is More Powerful. Best Guidance by Vikas Divyakirti sir Hindi Motivation’. Mandoliya alleged that the statements in the video were not only insulting to judges and lawyers but also undermined public confidence in the judiciary.
According to the complaint, Divyakirti allegedly stated, “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 court observed, “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 judge further remarked that Divyakirti used an indecent and insulting tone against the judiciary and that the video’s content mocked the judiciary before IAS aspirants. The court also noted the increasing trend of defaming the judiciary for social media popularity, stating, “Veiled threats, indecent behaviour, use of abusive language, maliciously attacking the judiciary… 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.”
The court directed Dr. Divyakirti to appear in person on July 22 and asked the Ajmer Police to investigate the matter further.
Responding to the allegations, Divyakirti denied authorship and authorisation of the video, claiming he had no control over the YouTube channel that posted it and suggesting the material may have been edited or extracted without his consent. He also argued that his comments, even if attributed to him, were part of general commentary on public matters and protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, and did not target any specific individual or group.
However, the court held that the statements went beyond permissible speech and carried a tendency to lower public trust in the judicial system.
The next hearing in the matter is scheduled for July 22.
