Why in the News?

The Supreme Court has stayed a Lokpal order bringing High Court judges under its jurisdiction while terming the top anti-corruption ombudsman’s interpretation very disturbing.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Introduction (Context, About Lokpal & Lokayuktas, Significance of the Act, Challenges, etc.)
• News Summary (SC Judgement, Implications)

Introduction

• The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, was introduced to combat corruption at the highest levels of government in India.
• It provides for the establishment of the Lokpal at the central level and Lokayuktas in states, empowering them to investigate complaints against public officials, including the Prime Minister, Ministers, and Members of Parliament.
• The Act was a result of prolonged public movements against corruption, particularly the India Against Corruption movement led by Anna Hazare.
• It aims to bring greater transparency and accountability in governance by establishing an independent anti-corruption body with investigative powers.

About Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013

• The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, establishes a multi-member anti-corruption body with the authority to investigate allegations of corruption against high-ranking public officials.
• The Lokpal is responsible for handling cases at the central level, while Lokayuktas are set up by individual states to deal with corruption cases at the state level.
• Key Features of the Act:
  • Establishment of Lokpal: A central institution headed by a chairperson and up to eight members, including judicial and non-judicial members.
  • Jurisdiction: Covers the Prime Minister (with certain exceptions), Ministers, MPs, and Group A and B officers of the central government.
  • Lokayuktas in States: Every state is required to establish a Lokayukta to investigate corruption allegations against state officials.
  • Inquiry and Prosecution Powers: Lokpal has power to order inquiries, recommend prosecution, and direct disciplinary action.
  • Whistleblower Protection: The Act provides safeguards for whistleblowers reporting corruption cases.

Significance of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act

• Strengthening Anti-Corruption Measures
  • The Act provides an independent watchdog mechanism to investigate corruption cases at both central and state levels, ensuring greater transparency in public office.
• Public Accountability
  • By bringing top government officials, including the Prime Minister and MPs, under scrutiny, the Act reinforces public trust in governance.
• Empowering Lokpal with Investigative Powers
  • The Lokpal has the authority to conduct independent inquiries and recommend prosecution without needing prior government approval.
• Ensuring State-Level Vigilance
  • The requirement to set up Lokayuktas in every state strengthens state-level anti-corruption mechanisms.

Challenges and Criticisms

• Delay in Lokayukta Implementation: Many states have not yet appointed Lokayuktas, weakening the state-level anti-corruption framework.
• Limited Investigative Autonomy: The CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation), which assists in investigations, still functions under government control, affecting its independence.
• Lack of Public Awareness: Many citizens are unaware of Lokpal’s role and how to file complaints, reducing its effectiveness.
• Political Interference: Critics argue that appointments to Lokpal are influenced by the ruling government, impacting its impartiality.

News Summary

• In a major legal development, the Supreme Court stayed a Lokpal order that sought to bring High Court judges under its jurisdiction.
• Background of the Case:
  • The January 27, 2025, order of Lokpal declared that High Court judges are 'public servants' under the Lokpal Act, 2013, and can be investigated.
  • The Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance and halted this decision, stating it was “very disturbing” and could affect the independence of the judiciary​.
  • A Special Bench of Justices B.R. Gavai, Surya Kant, and A.S. Oka expressed concerns over this interpretation​.
  • Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and B.H. Marlapalle provided arguments, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented the government and opposed the Lokpal’s jurisdiction over judges.
  • The Supreme Court ordered that the case be heard on March 18, 2025, while keeping the identity of the concerned judge confidential​.
• Implications of the Supreme Court’s Stay:
  • Maintaining Judicial Independence: The decision reinforces that judges cannot be treated as public servants under the Lokpal Act.
  • Clarification of Jurisdiction: It highlights the difference between High Court and Supreme Court judges, as the Lokpal had earlier ruled that it does not have jurisdiction over Supreme Court judges.
  • Legal Precedent: The case could set a precedent for future interpretations of judicial accountability under anti-corruption laws.