Supreme Court reopens debate Today (March 18) on whether Lokpal can act against sitting High Court judges. Next hearing scheduled for April 15 at 2 PM.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: A constitutional matter concerning the jurisdiction of the Lokpal over sitting High Court judges was heard by the Supreme Court of India today.
The case revisits the Court’s previous ruling that restricted the anti-corruption body from handling complaints against sitting members of the judiciary.
Key Developments in Today’s Hearing
A three-judge bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, and Justice Abhay S. Oka presided over the proceedings.
The Court directed that copies of all pleadings filed by Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Ranjit Kumar, and others be shared with all parties involved.
Announcing the next hearing date, Justice B.R. Gavai stated:
“We will hear this matter on April 15 at 2 PM.”
Key Arguments Presented
During the hearing, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta acknowledged the complexity of the issue, referring to a past ruling.
He emphasized:
“The question is not about how the police should handle it. We have the Veeraswamy judgment, which outlines the procedure for granting sanction.”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal raised an important constitutional question:
“Can a complaint be filed beyond the scope of a constitutional authority, such as the police? This is a broader issue.”
Complainant Stands Firm on Judicial Integrity
The petitioner, who appeared in person, expressed concerns regarding judicial accountability, stating:
“I want the honor of the Lokpal and judiciary to be upheld.”
Justice Surya Kant extended an offer for legal assistance, saying:
“We can permit assistance if you wish to seek help from a senior advocate.”
However, the complainant declined, asserting that all necessary arguments had been submitted in writing.
Appointment of Amicus Curiae
Recognizing the complexity of the case, the Supreme Court appointed Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar as Amicus Curiae to assist in the matter.
Registry Directed to Accept Submissions
A procedural concern was also raised by Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who pointed out that the registry was refusing to accept submissions without an Advocate-on-Record (AoR).
Addressing this, Justice Gavai directed the registry to accept submissions from all counsels mentioned.
Next Steps: Supreme Court to Revisit Case on April 15
The Supreme Court has scheduled the next hearing for April 15 at 2 PM, where it will continue deliberations on whether the Lokpal can entertain complaints against sitting High Court judges.
The case holds major constitutional significance, as it could redefine the accountability framework for higher judiciary members while balancing judicial independence with anti-corruption oversight.
BACKGROUND
The Supreme Court started looking into this case after the Lokpal issued an order on January 27. When the court discussed this issue on February 20, it decided to put a hold on the Lokpal’s decision.
The court found it to be “something very, very disturbing” because it raised concerns about the independence of the judiciary.
The Supreme Court also sent a notice to the central government, the Lokpal registrar, and the person who had filed the complaint against a sitting high court judge. It asked them to provide their responses.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represented the central government, said that under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, a high court judge does not fall under the Lokpal’s jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court also issued an order regarding the complaints made against the sitting high court judge. It directed that the complainant must not reveal the judge’s name and should keep the complaint confidential.
The Lokpal had issued its order in response to two complaints against an additional judge of a high court. The complaints alleged that the judge had influenced another additional district judge and a high court judge. These judges were supposed to decide a case against the complainant, which was filed by a private company.
The complainant further alleged that this private company had previously been a client of the high court judge when he was working as a lawyer before becoming a judge.
The Lokpal then directed that all documents related to these complaints be sent to the Chief Justice of India for his consideration.
“Awaiting the guidance of the Chief Justice of India, consideration of these complaints, for the time being, is deferred until four weeks from today, keeping in mind the statutory time frame to dispose of the complaint in terms of Section 20 (4) of the Act of 2013,”
-said the Lokpal bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar on January 27.
The Lokpal also stated,
“We make it amply clear that by this order we have decided a singular issue finally — as to whether the judges of the high court established by an Act of Parliament come within the ambit of Section 14 of the Act of 2013, in the affirmative. No more and no less. In that, we have not looked into or examined the merits of the allegations at all.”
The order further mentioned that it would be “too naive” to say that a high court judge does not come under the meaning of “any person” as mentioned in clause (f) of section 14 (1) of the 2013 Act.
This case is crucial as it deals with whether the Lokpal has the authority to entertain complaints against sitting high court judges. The Supreme Court’s decision will clarify this legal issue.
Case Title:
IN RE : ORDER DATED 27/01/2025 PASSED BY LOKPAL OF INDIA AND ANCILLIARY ISSUES
SMW(C) No. 2/2025.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI Sanjeev Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
