New Delhi: The Lokpal of India has disposed of a complaint filed against former Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud alleging abuse of office, amounting to corruption and malicious exercise of power to favour and protect a certain politician and political party, saying the complaint is barred by jurisdiction.
Lokpal chairperson Justice AM Khanwilkar and five other members, while disposing of the complaint filed on October 18 last year when Justice Chandrachud was the sitting CJI, said, “We must eschew from dilating upon diverse allegations contained in this complaint running into 382 pages. We say no more.”
CJI Chandrachud demitted office on November 10 last year.
Read More
“We dispose of this complaint as being barred by jurisdiction.” the Lokpal said in the order dated January 3.
The Lokpal said in its order that the complainant was free to pursue other remedies, as permissible in law.
Lokpal examined whether a sitting CJI or a SC judge is amenable to jurisdiction of Lokpal
The Lokpal examined in detail whether a sitting Chief Justice of India or a judge of the Supreme Court of India is amenable to the jurisdiction of the Lokpal in terms of section 14 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.
What did the Lokpal say in the order?
The Lokpal, in its order, said that a sitting judge or CJI would not come within the ambit of clauses (a) to (e), (g) and (h) of the Act and “The only expansive clause that may come into play is Clause (f), which, however, predicates that any person who is or has been a chairperson or member or officer or employee in any ‘body’ or board or corporation or authority or company or society or trust or autonomous body (by whatever name called) ‘established by an Act of Parliament’ or wholly or partly financed by the central government or controlled by it.”
The Lokpal further said that the Supreme Court, even though a body of judges, does not come within the ambit of expression “body” employed in section 14(1)(f) of the Act, as it is not established by an “Act of Parliament” as such and further, the Supreme Court is neither wholly or partly financed by the central government or controlled by it as such.
“The sitting judge of the Supreme Court or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court will not be amenable to the constricted jurisdiction of the Lokpal of India in terms of Section 14 of the Act of 2013,” the Lokpal said.
View was only to consider status of judges and CJI: Lokpal
The Lokpal, in its order, however, clarified that the view “propounded hitherto” was only to consider the status of the judges and the CJI of the Supreme Court, having been established by virtue of Article 124 of the Constitution and this view may not squarely apply to the judges of the other courts, including high courts.
