Supreme Court to examine Lokpal's jurisdiction over judges

In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court has postponed until April 15 its examination of a suo motu case addressing the Lokpal's jurisdiction over allegations against a sitting high court judge. The case focuses on the scope of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, rather than reviewing the specifics of the allegations.

A three-judge bench comprising Justices B R Gavai, Surya Kant, and A S Oka is tasked with clarifying whether the Lokpal has the authority to investigate such complaints. "Our concern is strictly with the jurisdiction under the Lokpal Act," Justice Gavai emphasized.

Previously, on February 27, the Supreme Court had expressed concern over the Lokpal's January 27 decision, which it described as "very disturbing." That order was in response to two complaints against a serving additional judge of a high court.

Recognizing the importance of all perspectives, the court appointed senior advocate Ranjit Kumar as amicus curiae to aid its deliberations. Despite being offered legal assistance, the complainant opted to represent himself.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Central government, highlighted that the core matter was a legal question regarding the Act's jurisdiction. "The analysis of a specific section of the Lokpal Act is required to ascertain the Lokpal's jurisdiction," he stated.

Justice Gavai pointed out that there are existing mechanisms for addressing complaints against judges.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal challenged the Lokpal's decision, raising a broader constitutional query. "The fundamental issue is whether a complaint can bypass constitutional authority," he argued, while SG Mehta referenced existing judgments relevant to the case.

“This is not about the ability to file an FIR against a constitutional court judge,” Mehta clarified, emphasizing that procedural matters such as police considerations and sanctions are not under discussion.

In a protective measure, the court assured the complainant that his identity would remain confidential in the records. "We acknowledge the issue you're raising," Justice Gavai assured him.

The contested Lokpal order, led by former Supreme Court judge Justice A M Khanwilkar, argued that judges fall under the "any person" category in Section 14(1)(f) of the Lokpal Act. The order, however, did not address the merits of the allegations, underscoring its focus solely on jurisdictional interpretation.