Supreme Court's Response to Lokpal's Order
The Supreme Court addressed the Lokpal's January 27 decision that categorized High Court judges as 'public servants' under the Lokpal Act. This decision was deemed "very disturbing" by the Supreme Court, which stayed the order.
Details of the Supreme Court's Reaction
- The court's Special Bench included Justices B.R. Gavai, Surya Kant, and A.S. Oka, all senior judges and members of the Collegium.
- Noteworthy legal figures like senior advocates Kapil Sibal and B.H. Marlapalle, along with Solicitor General Tushar Mehta representing the Union government, participated in the hearing.
- The Bench issued notices to the Centre, the Registrar of Lokpal, and the complainant involved in the January 27 order.
- The complainant was ordered to maintain confidentiality about the High Court judge's identity and the complaint's details.
Arguments and Rationale
- The Lokpal's order, chaired by former Supreme Court judge A.M. Khanwilkar, stemmed from allegations that a High Court judge influenced decisions favoring a former client. The Lokpal concluded that High Court judges fell under public servants per the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act of 2013.
- The jurisdiction was based on the historical formation of High Courts through British Acts, contrasting them with the Supreme Court being a product of the Indian Constitution.
- The court cited Article 214, acknowledging the existence of High Courts, while Article 124 explicitly established the Supreme Court.
Legal Interpretations and Implications
- The Lokpal argued that High Court judges fell within the ambit of Section 14(1)(f) of the 2013 Act, which covers individuals in bodies established by Parliament.
- The absence of an explicit exception for judges in the Act supported the inclusion of High Court judges as 'public servants'.
- The Lokpal's order highlighted that all judges are appointed under the Constitution, a point underscored by Justice Oka during the Supreme Court hearing.
