The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed a recent decision of the Lokpal of India that asserted jurisdiction over High Court judges, raising significant legal questions about the scope of the Lokpal Act.
A Bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, and Justice Abhay S. Oka took suo motu cognizance of the matter and issued notice, expressing serious concerns over the implications of Lokpal’s ruling.
The case before the Lokpal presided over by former Supreme Court judge Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, involved allegations against a sitting High Court judge. The judge was accused of influencing an Additional District Judge and another High Court judge to favour a private company in a civil dispute.
Taking note of the Lokpal’s order, the Supreme Court stepped in to examine whether the Lokpal Act extends to the higher judiciary. During the hearing, Justice Gavai remarked, ” Mr Solicitor, we would like to issue notice, Something very very disturbing.”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing in the matter, supported the Court’s intervention, emphasizing the need for clarity on the Lokpal’s jurisdiction over judges. “The law needs to be laid down. The order needs to be stayed,” Sibal submitted.
Concurring with Sibal’s argument, the Bench agreed to stay the Lokpal’s order and tentatively scheduled the matter for hearing after Holi on March 18.
The Court while granting a stay on the Lokpal’s order issued a notice in the suo motu proceedings.
The Court however directed that an Injunction be imposed on the complainant from disclosing the name of the Judge or revealing the complaint’s contents.
The Lokpal’s ruling, delivered on January 27 by Justice Khanwilkar, interpreted Section 14(1)(f) of the Lokpal Act, 2013, to include High Court judges as “persons in a body established by an Act of Parliament.”
The reasoning was that since the concerned High Court was created for a newly formed State by a Parliamentary Act, its judges fall under the Lokpal’s jurisdiction.
“It will be too na?ve to argue that a Judge of a High Court will not come within the ambit of the expression ‘any person’ in clause (f) of Section 14(1) of the Act of 2013,” the Lokpal stated in its order.
While the Lokpal did not examine the merits of the complaint, it forwarded the allegations to the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court for further action.
With the Supreme Court now stepping in, the legal question of whether the Lokpal can exercise oversight over the higher judiciary is set to undergo a crucial constitutional examination.
