New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday (February 20), while terming a recent order of Lokpal entertaining complaints against a sitting high court judge as “very disturbing”, and stayed the Lokpal order.
A special bench comprising Justice BR Gavai, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Abhay S Oka issued notice to the Centre and others and sought their response in a suo motu proceedings initiated over the Lokpal’s January 27 order.
What did the apex court say?
The special bench, while hearing the matter, injuncted the complainant from disclosing the name of the judge and also directed the complainant to keep the complaint filed by him confidential.
“There shall be stay of the impugned order (Lokpal). We further injunct the complainant from disclosing the name of the Hon’ble Judge against whom he has filed complaint and disclosing contents of the complaint,” the special bench said.
Lokpal order was passed on two complaints filed against a sitting high court judge
The order by Lokpal was passed on two complaints filed against a sitting additional judge of the high court. The complainant alleged that the judge in question influenced an additional district judge in the state and a judge of the same high court to favour a private company in a suit filed against the complainant.
Apex Court on Wednesday took suo motu cognisance
The top court on Wednesday took suo motu cognisance of the Lokpal order directing that subject complaints and relevant materials received in the registry in these two complaints be forwarded to the office of the Chief Justice of India for his kind consideration.
What did the Lokpal order say?
“Awaiting the guidance of the Chief Justice of India, consideration of these complaints, for the time being, is deferred until four weeks from today, keeping in mind the statutory time frame to dispose of the complaint in terms of Section 20 (4) of the Act of 2013.
“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,” the Lokpal bench headed by Justice AM Khanwilkar said in its January 27 order.
