New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday put a hold on a Lokpal directive that entertained complaints against a sitting High Court judge, expressing serious concerns over the matter and calling it "something very, very disturbing" in relation to judicial independence.

A special bench led by Justice B R Gavai issued notices to the Centre, the Lokpal registrar, and the complainant while seeking their responses.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, argued that a High Court judge does not come under the purview of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.

The bench, which also included Justices Surya Kant and Abhay S Oka, restrained the complainant from disclosing the judge’s identity and directed that the complaint remain confidential.

The apex court initiated suo motu proceedings over the January 27 order by the Lokpal.

“Issue notice to the Union of India, the registrar of Lokpal, and the complainant. The registrar (judicial) is directed to mask the identity of the complainant and serve him through the registrar (judicial) of the high court where the complainant resides,” the bench ordered.

“In the meantime, there shall be stay to the impugned order,” it added.

‘Something very disturbing’

As soon as the proceedings commenced, Justice Gavai stated, "We propose to issue notice to the Union of India."

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared in the matter, offered to assist the court in addressing the issue.

"Something very, very disturbing," Justice Gavai remarked during the hearing.

Sibal echoed similar concerns, emphasising the potential risks involved. "It is fraught with danger," he said, urging the court to stay the Lokpal’s order.

He further asserted, "I think a law should be laid down."

The court has scheduled the next hearing for March 18, subject to further directions from the Chief Justice of India.

Lokpal’s order and the allegations
 

The case arose from two complaints filed against a sitting Additional Judge of a High Court, alleging that he had influenced an Additional District Judge and another High Court judge to rule in favour of a private company that had a pending suit against the complainant. The complainant claimed the company had previously engaged the judge as legal counsel before his appointment to the bench.

In its January 27 order, the Lokpal decided to forward the complaints and relevant materials to the Chief Justice of India for his consideration.

"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," the Lokpal bench, headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar, stated.

It further clarified, "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."

With the Supreme Court's intervention, further deliberations on the matter will take place in the coming weeks.

Agencies