Disciplinary Action Can Be Initiated Against RPF Personnel Based Video Clips Even If Victim Doesn't File Complaint: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that disciplinary proceedings against a member of the Railway Protection Force can be initiated on the basis of material such as CCTV footage and a video clip, even in the absence of a formal complaint by the victim. The Court observed that non-filing of a complaint by the victim does not render the initiation of disciplinary inquiry without jurisdiction when the conduct is otherwise evident from material on record.

A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande was hearing a writ petition filed by an RPF constable challenging the order of removal from service passed after a departmental inquiry, which was upheld in appeal and revision. The case arose from an incident where the petitioner, after completing duty, was seated on a platform bench next to a woman when an altercation occurred, and he was slapped by another person. No complaint was lodged by the woman or any member of the public; however, a video clip of the incident was circulated on social media, and CCTV footage of the platform was also available. The petitioner contended that the inquiry was unjustified in the absence of any complaint and that the act attributed to him was inadvertent.

The Court examined the scheme of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 and noted that the disciplinary authority is empowered to initiate proceedings on receipt of a complaint or otherwise. It observed that the material in the form of CCTV footage and the video clip, which captured the incident on the railway platform involving a member of the Force, constituted a sufficient basis for initiating disciplinary proceedings.

The Court rejected the contention that the absence of a complaint by the woman or any other person rendered the proceedings invalid. It noted that the incident had taken place on railway premises and involved a uniformed member of a disciplined force, and the material on record, including the video and CCTV footage, reflected the occurrence of the incident.

“The Disciplinary Authority deemed it appropriate to initiate an inquiry by issuing charge-sheet since it was of the view that the alleged act which was widely publicised brought discredit to the reputation of the Force and we do not find that merely because the lady did not make a complaint, the inquiry initiated is without jurisdiction,” the Court observed.

Upon examining the inquiry proceedings, the Court noted that the petitioner was furnished with the material relied upon, including the video clip and CCTV footage, and was given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings. It was observed that the inquiry officer had considered the evidence, including the testimony of witnesses and the material placed on record, before returning a finding of guilt.

The Court further observed that on viewing the video, it is evidently clear that the intention of the petitioner is to outrage the modesty of the woman, and hence, there is no arbitrariness or excessiveness in the penalty imposed upon him. The Court emphasised that the conduct of the petitioner was immoral and disgraceful.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the order of removal from service.

Case Title: Rajesh Sahadeo Jangid vs. Union of India & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 7616 of 2021]

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 169

Click Here To Read/Download Order