The Supreme Court has moved a significant suo motu case to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna. The case questions whether the Lokpal of India has the authority to investigate a complaint against a sitting High Court judge.
A three-judge bench, consisting of Justices BR Gavai, Surya Kant, and Abhay S Oka, was previously handling the case. However, the bench has now decided that only a bench led by the Chief Justice should handle such a sensitive and constitutional matter.
“Awaiting the guidance of the Hon’ble 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,” — Lokpal order
Read Also:- Citizens Who Approach Police Station To Report Crime Entitled To Be Treated With Dignity : Supreme Court
Justice Oka highlighted this part of the Lokpal’s order, stating that the matter directly requires the involvement and guidance of the CJI due to the constitutional implications.
This case started when the Lokpal accepted a complaint accusing a sitting High Court judge of misusing influence to benefit a private company in a legal dispute. In response, the Supreme Court took suo motu notice of the Lokpal's action.
On February 20, while issuing notice to the Union Government, the Registrar General of the Lokpal, and the complainant, the Court put a stay on the Lokpal’s decision. Justice BR Gavai had remarked:
“Something very disturbing,” — Justice Gavai on Lokpal’s reasoning
He and Justice Oka also reminded that High Court judges are constitutional authorities, not just statutory functionaries. This view sharply contrasted with the Lokpal's interpretation of the law.
Later, on March 18, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and senior lawyers Kapil Sibal and BH Marlapalle presented their arguments against the Lokpal’s stance. To ensure fairness, the bench appointed Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar as Amicus Curiae (a neutral advisor to the court). Justice Gavai made it clear:
“We will only decide whether Lokpal has jurisdiction over High Court judges, not the merits of the complaint,” — Justice Gavai
The issue began with a Lokpal order dated January 27, where the Lokpal, led by former SC judge AM Khanwilkar, ruled that High Court judges can fall under the jurisdiction of Lokpal under Section 14(1)(f) of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. The reasoning was that since the concerned High Court was formed through a Parliamentary Act, its judges qualify as part of a body created by Parliament.
“It will be too naive to argue that a Judge of a High Court will not come within the ambit of expression ‘any person’ in clause (f) of Section 14(1) of the Act of 2013,” — Lokpal order
Read Also:- Jharkhand High Court: ACP/MACP Benefits Must Be Based on Service Completion, Not Extra Qualifications
However, the Lokpal clarified it was not giving any opinion on the actual complaint against the judge. It was only deciding whether it has jurisdiction over High Court judges under the law.
“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,” — Lokpal
In contrast, the Lokpal has earlier held that it has no power to investigate Supreme Court judges or the Chief Justice of India, since the Supreme Court is not a body created by an Act of Parliament.
The case, titled "IN RE: ORDER DATED 27/01/2025 PASSED BY LOKPAL OF INDIA AND ANCILLARY ISSUES, SMW(C) No. 2/2025," now awaits guidance and decision from a bench led by CJI Sanjiv Khanna.
