The Lokpal has dismissed a corruption complaint against former Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, citing lack of jurisdiction. The anti-corruption Inspector clarified that sitting judges and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court do not fall within its purview under Section 14 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act. This provision restricts the Lokpal’s authority to probe complaints against such high-ranking judicial officials.
New Delhi: The Lokpal, which serves as the anti-corruption inspector , dismissed a complaint alleging corruption against former Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, stating it was “barred by jurisdiction,” according to an official order.
The complaint filed on October 18, 2024, accusing the sitting CJI at that time of “abuse of office, amounting to corruption and malicious exercise of power to favor and protect a certain politician and political party.”
CJI Chandrachud stepped down from his position on November 10.
Read Also: [EXCLUSIVE] Ex-CJI Chandrachud To Be Appointed As Next Chairperson Of NHRC
In its January 3 order, the Lokpal examined whether a sitting CJI or Supreme Court judge falls under its jurisdiction as specified in Section 14 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act.
The Lokpal decided not to elaborate on the numerous allegations presented in the 382-page complaint, stating,
“We say no more. In light of the above, we dispose of this complaint as being barred by jurisdiction.”
The order, issued by Lokpal chairperson Justice AM Khanwilkar and five other members, noted that the complainant could pursue other legal remedies available. It clarified that the Lokpal had not expressed any opinion regarding the merits of the allegations or the maintainability of any legal actions the complainant might consider.
The Lokpal explored various provisions of Section 14, which pertains to the jurisdiction of the Lokpal over public servants, including members of Parliament and government officials.
It concluded that,
“Indubitably, a sitting judge or CJI would not come within the ambit of clauses (a) to (e), (g) and (h).”
The only potentially relevant clause was Clause (f), which pertains to individuals associated with bodies established by an Act of Parliament. However, the Lokpal asserted that the Supreme Court does not fit this description, as it was established under Article 124 of the Indian Constitution, not by an Act of Parliament,
“To this, the answer is an emphatic ‘NO.’ For, the Supreme Court of India has been established by virtue of Article 124 of the Constitution of India.”
The order further stated that the Supreme Court is not financed or controlled by the central government, and thus, judges of the Supreme Court, including the CJI, are not subject to the Lokpal’s jurisdiction under Section 14. It also noted that this interpretation may not necessarily apply to judges of lower courts, including high courts.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
