Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

Premature Writ Petition Rejected: Delhi High Court Upholds Lokpal’s Jurisdiction in MP Shibu Soren’s Alleged Corruption Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court’s judgment focused on the question of the Lokpal’s jurisdiction to investigate allegations of corruption against a sitting Member of Parliament, Shibu Soren, under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. Specifically, it addressed the applicability of Section 53 of the Act, which limits inquiries into complaints made after seven years from the date of the alleged offense, and the Lokpal’s decision-making process under Sections 20(1) and 20(3) of the Act.

Facts and Issues: The case revolved around a complaint filed by Lok Sabha MP, Nishikant Dubey, alleging that Shibu Soren, a Rajya Sabha MP, engaged in corrupt practices and acquired several properties through unfair means. The Lokpal directed the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry under Section 20(1) of the Act. Soren challenged the proceedings, arguing that most acquisitions occurred over seven years ago, hence falling outside Lokpal’s jurisdiction as per Section 53.

Court’s Assessment: The court examined the Lokpal’s authority and process under Sections 20(1) and 20(3) of the Act. It was determined that the Lokpal had correctly initiated a preliminary inquiry to ascertain a prima facie case. The court noted, “the stage at which the question as to whether the complaint is barred under Section 53 is required to be decided, will depend on facts of each case.” It was held that this need not necessarily be decided at the time of ordering a preliminary inquiry under Section 20(1)(a) but may be decided after the inquiry report is received.

The court also observed that the complaint Involved allegations beyond just the acquisition of properties, including misuse of power and ongoing incidents of amassing wealth. Therefore, it was not a fit case for the Lokpal to reject the complaint initially as being barred by limitation.

Decision of the Judgment: The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the Lokpal was yet to make a final decision under Section 20(3) and that the writ petition filed by Shibu Soren was premature. The court found no reason to interfere with the Single Judge’s decision and upheld the Lokpal’s jurisdiction in proceeding with the complaint.

Date of Decision: 20th February 2024

Shibu Soren vs Lokpal of India & Anr.

 

Latest Legal News