Sleaze tapes involving the powerful are hardly unfamiliar in Karnataka’s political and bureaucratic history. What makes the latest episode different—and far more serious—is that, for the first time, a serving Director General of Police has been suspended after obscene videos allegedly showing him in compromising situations with women inside his office went viral. The 47-second clip, comprising three recordings involving different women, features K Ramachandra Rao, head of the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement. Its circulation has embarrassed not only the state police but also the government, which moved swiftly to place the officer under suspension. Rao has claimed the videos are fabricated and intended to target him.
Two issues demand scrutiny. One is the question of consent in encounters involving a senior police officer exercising enormous institutional authority. The other is the standard of propriety expected of an IPS officer, especially within an official workplace. In an era where deepfakes and digitally manipulated content can be generated and disseminated with ease, the claim of fabrication cannot be dismissed out of hand. At the same time, if the recordings are genuine, their creation within a high-security government office raises troubling questions about how such material was recorded and accessed. Either scenario calls for restraint and rigour. Trial by social media serves no one. What is required is a forensic, technology-driven investigation by a competent and independent agency, capable of determining authenticity, consent and culpability.
The case is further complicated by Rao’s past brush with controversy. As the stepfather of Kannada actor Ranya Rao—convicted under COFEPOSA in a gold smuggling case—he was earlier suspended while heading the State Police Housing and Infrastructure Development Corporation, before being cleared and reinstated. That history makes it all the more important that the present inquiry be seen as fair, thorough and free of political or institutional bias.
The government’s January 19 suspension order, citing “prima facie” grounds pending inquiry, is appropriate. High office demands higher standards. While the suspension shields the police force from immediate reputational damage, only an impartial and exhaustive probe can restore credibility and establish the truth.