Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday 'dismissed' Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) President Shibu Soren's plea challenging a single-judge bench order refusing to interfere in Lokpal proceedings initiated against him in a disproportionate asset case. 

The division bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar said, "We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the impugned order, holding that the writ petition filed by the appellant was premature. The appeal being meritless is, accordingly, dismissed with all accompanying applications."

The court was hearing an appeal filed by Soren against the single-judge's order refusing to interfere in Lokpal proceedings initiated against him in a disproportionate asset case. 

The bench noted that, based on specific allegations levelled by respondent no. 2 (complainant), it is evident to us that the complaint pertains not only to the purchase of properties, which the appellant claims were purchased more than 7 years ago, but also to ongoing incidents of amassing wealth by misuse of power by the appellant.

"In the light of these allegations, we are unable to accept the appellant’s plea that it was a fit case where the respondent no. 1 ought to have at the very first instance rejected the complaint as being barred by limitation," it said.

The bench added, "In fact, the respondent no. 1 (Lokpal of India) is yet to take a decision as to whether or not a prima facie case exists for directing investigation against the appellant by any agency, including the Delhi Special Police Establishment. In this factual matrix, we find no infirmity with the approach adopted by the respondent no. 1".

Notably, in January, Justice Subramonium Prasad refused to interfere in the Lokpal proceedings, and remarked orally, "The plea is premature at this stage."

"This Court, therefore, does not want to enter into this realm at this juncture, and it is for the Lokpal to take a decision as to whether there is sufficient material to proceed further for investigation or not in order to subserve the purpose for which the Act has been brought out," Justice Prasad had said.

"Writ courts cannot substitute themselves as an authority which has been vested with a duty under the Statute to consider as to whether there is material in it or not for ordering an investigation. The writ petition, therefore, is premature in nature," the court had stated.

Justice Prasad had said that the Office of Lokpal is completely independent, and an argument that the Lokpal would be influenced by political consideration cannot be countenanced. "This allegation that the proceedings before the Lokpal are vitiated and can be politically motivated cannot be accepted," he had said.

"The Lokpal will examine the entire matter independently and shall take a decision as to whether an investigation has to be ordered or not which order is always amenable for challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The CBI has submitted a preliminary inquiry and the Lokpal has to take a decision as to whether to proceed further in the case or not," he had added.

Case Title: Shibu Soren v. Lokpal of India & Anr.