Can Lokpal Investigate High Court Judges? Understanding Its Jurisdiction and Limitations

Introduction

On February 20, 2025, a special bench of Justices B.R. Gavai, Surya Kant, and A.S. Oka discussed a recent ruling by the Lokpal. Justice Gavai called the ruling "very disturbing." The issue arose when the Lokpal, led by former Supreme Court judge A.M. Khanwilkar, decided that sitting High Court judges appointed under parliamentary acts come under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.

The Supreme Court stepped in after the Lokpal took up a corruption complaint against an unnamed High Court judge. On January 27, 2025, the Lokpal said it had the authority to investigate such complaints. However, the Supreme Court, acting on its own, put the Lokpal's order on hold until the next hearing on March 18, 2025. The Court raised serious concerns about judicial independence and the division of powers.

Symbolic representation of Lokpal jurisdiction in India, featuring justice, legal authority, and governance.

Lokpal’s Argument

The Lokpal justified its authority based on the following points:

• High Court judges qualify as "Public Servants" under Section 14(1)(f) of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.

• Unlike the Supreme Court, Indian High Courts were originally established by British laws, such as the Indian High Courts Act, 1861 and the Government of India Act, 1935.

• Article 214 of the Constitution "recognizes" the existence of High Courts but does not establish them. Hence, the Lokpal argued that judges of such courts fall under its jurisdiction.

Legal Frameworks for Complaints Against Judges:

There are strict legal provisions governing the filing of cases against judges:

• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 15): Judges cannot be prosecuted for actions performed in their official capacity.

• K. Veeraswami v. Union of India (1991): Any criminal case against a judge requires prior approval from the President, following consultation with the Chief Justice of India. This safeguard prevents frivolous cases and unnecessary harassment.

• This legal procedure is different from impeachment, which is the constitutional process for removing judges.

Case Details Leading to the Conflict :

The Supreme Court immediately stayed the Lokpal’s order, citing several concerns:

• Judicial Independence: Protecting judges from external interference while ensuring accountability.

• Separation of Powers: The Lokpal, a statutory body under the executive branch, asserting authority over High Court judges could violate the balance of power.

• Protection from Harassment: Allowing the Lokpal to investigate judges might expose them to baseless complaints, affecting their work and integrity.

• Risk of Political Influence: If the Lokpal assumes jurisdiction over High Court judges, it could lead to political pressure or retaliatory complaints, compromising judicial impartiality.

Supreme Court Concerned About the Lokpal's Assertion of Jurisdiction?

The Supreme Court's immediate stay and characterization of the Lokpal's order as "very, very disturbing" reflects several deep concerns: 

• Judicial Independence: The Court has historically balanced acknowledging criticism of judges with protecting judicial independence from executive overreach. 

• Separation of Powers: The Lokpal, as an independent statutory body under the executive branch, represents a potential new avenue for complaints against judges that might circumvent the carefully constructed processes established in the K. Veeraswami case. 

• Protection from Harassment: The Court appears concerned that allowing the Lokpal to exercise jurisdiction over High Court judges could undermine the constitutional safeguards designed to protect judges from harassment while performing their duties. 

• Potential for Political Pressure: This jurisdictional overlap could potentially expose judges to political pressure or retaliatory complaints that might compromise their independence. 

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s final ruling on the Lokpal’s jurisdiction will have a major impact on judicial accountability and independence in India. It will clarify whether the Lokpal has authority over the judiciary and reinforce procedural safeguards for investigating judges. 

As the legal battle continues, it is clear that India’s judiciary remains fiercely protective of its autonomy. The case, set for its next hearing on March 18, will likely shape the future of judicial accountability in the country.

Empower Your Legal Practice with AI

Are you a legal professional? Stay ahead with our innovative Lawttornet.AI tool. Streamline your legal processes, enhance productivity, and gain a competitive edge. Experience the future of legal technology—try our free Webinar session today!