Justice Gavai opts out of hearing suo motu matter on Lokpal's order to examine complaint against HC judge

After the recusal by the incoming Chief Justice, the bench scheduled the matter for consideration in July.

New Delhi: Incoming Chief Justice of India B R Gavai on Wednesday opted out of the hearing of a matter related to validity of the Lokpal's order of January 27, 2025 holding that anti corruption watchdog can examine a complaint against a sitting High Court judge.

"This matter is to go before another bench as the Lokpal order sought guidance of the Chief Justice of India," Justice Abhay S Oka said, sitting in a bench presided over by Justice B R Gavai and also comprising Justice Surya Kant.

Justice Oka clarified that it is a matter of propriety as the operative part of the Lokpal's order sought guidance from the Chief Justice of India on administrative side for looking into complaints filed against a sitting judge and an additional judge of one High Court.

Justice Gavai was on Tuesday appointed as the CJI. He would take oath of the office on May 14 on superannuation of incumbent CJI Sanjiv Khanna on May 13.

After recusal by Justice Gavai, the bench scheduled the matter for consideration in July.

The court has registered a suo motu matter as the Lokpal bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar, former SC judge, held judges of the High Court would be amenable to its jurisdiction to investigate allegations of corruption. 

On February 20, the apex court had stayed the Lokpal's order, orally observing that it was "something very very disturbing".

The court had then said that after the commencement of the Constitution, High Court judges are constitutional authorities and not mere statutory functionaries as the Lokpal had concluded.

In the matter, the two complaints were filed by the same complainant against a sitting Additional Judge (name redacted) High Court, alleging that the named judge had influenced the concerned Additional District Judge, in the State and a judge of the same High Court who had to deal with the suit filed against the complainant by a private company, to favour that company. It was alleged that the private company was earlier client of the named High Court Judge, while he was practicing as an advocate at the Bar. 

In its order on January 27, the Lokpal said, "We make it amply clear that 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. In that, we have not looked into or examined the merits of the allegations at all".

Seeking guidance from the CJI, the Lokpal had then relied upon the dictum of the Constitution bench in K Veeraswami's case (1991), which stated no criminal case can be registered against a judge of the High Court, Chief Justice of the High Court or judge of the Supreme Court unless Chief Justice of India is consulted in the matter.

However, it had earlier on January 3, 2025 held that judges of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India are not amenable to its jurisdiction for they do not come within the sweep of definition of public servants and the Supreme Court has been established by the Constitution and not by an Act of Parliament.

On March 18, the Supreme Court on appointed senior advocate Ranjit Kumar. Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and B H Marlapalle sought to assist the court. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the Union government.