Synopsis
On March 18, the Supreme Court will review the Lokpal's authority to handle complaints against High Court judges, following a suo moto stay of the Lokpal's previous decision.Key Takeaways
- Supreme Court to examine Lokpal's jurisdiction over High Court judges.
- Stay on Lokpal's decision issued on February 20.
- Significant implications for the independence of the judiciary.
- Complaints forwarded to the CJI for consideration.
- Previous ruling indicated that Supreme Court judges are not under Lokpal's jurisdiction.
New Delhi, March 16 (NationPress) The Supreme Court is set to examine on March 18 a suo moto (on its own initiative) stay of a decision made by the Lokpal, which asserted that the anti-corruption agency could review complaints against High Court judges.
According to the cause list on the apex court's website, a panel consisting of Justices B.R. Gavai, Surya Kant, and Abhay S. Oka will continue the hearing of this suo moto case on Tuesday.
In an interim order dated February 20, the Supreme Court suspended the Lokpal's controversial decision after the anti-corruption body directed two complaints to the Chief Justice of India (CJI), which included allegations that a sitting additional judge of a High Court had influenced a colleague and an additional district judge dealing with a lawsuit initiated against the complainant by a private firm.
"Something quite alarming," remarked the Bench led by Justice Gavai, as it issued a notice to the Union Government and the Registrar of the Lokpal.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the second highest-ranking legal official of the Centre, argued that High Court judges do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. By placing a stay on the Lokpal's decision, the apex court noted that the matter is of significant importance concerning the independence of the judiciary.
Earlier, on January 27, the Lokpal determined that it could consider complaints against judges of High Courts established through an Act of Parliament. "By this order, we have resolved a singular issue definitively—whether Judges of High Courts established by an Act of Parliament are included within the scope of Section 14 of the 2013 Act, affirmatively. No more and no less. We have not evaluated the merits of the allegations," stated the Lokpal.
The Lokpal emphasized that while a complaint before it cannot be strictly compared to a criminal case as per Section 154 of the CrPC or the corresponding provision in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanita 2023, it must first ascertain whether a prima facie case exists before proceeding with further inquiries.
However, the anti-corruption body had directed the complaints to the CJI's office "for his kind consideration" and postponed deliberation on the complaints for four weeks.
Previously, the Lokpal had indicated that while the Supreme Court qualifies as public servants under Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, they do not fall under its jurisdiction, as they are not included in the definition of "public servant" as outlined in Section 2(1)(o)Section 14 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.
