New Delhi, Jan 22 (PTI) The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to interfere with the proceedings initiated against JMM chief Shibu Soren by the Lokpal on a complaint by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey, saying the former chief minister's contention that a complaint under the relevant law cannot be made after the expiry of seven years can't override the basic purpose of the Act brought in to prevent corruption in high offices.

Justice Subramonium Prasad said the former Jharkhand chief minister's petition challenging the Lokpal proceedings as well as the complaint was "premature" and it is for the ombudsman to see if there is sufficient material to proceed further.

Also Read | Union Budget 2024-25: Interim Budget To Signify BJP's Intent if Voted for Third Term, Says Expert.

"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 investigation. The writ petition, therefore, is premature in nature," the court stated.

"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 (Lokpal and Lokayukta) Act has been brought out," said the court.

Also Read | Union Budget 2024-25: Interim Budget on February 1 Likely To See Continued Govt Thrust on Big-Ticket Infrastructure Projects to Drive Economic Growth.

In the complaint made in August 2020, Dubey, the BJP Lok Sabha MP from Jharkhand's Godda seat, claimed Shibu Soren and his family acquired huge wealth by misusing the public exchequer and indulged in corruption.

On receipt of the complaint, the Lokpal directed the CBI to conduct a preliminary enquiry against Soren to ascertain whether there existed a prima facie case for proceeding against him.

In its 31-page judgement, Justice Prasad rejected the senior politician's allegation of "malice" and asserted that the Lokpal, which is an independent authority, was yet to apply its mind to the material provided by the CBI.

"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 is vitiated and can be politically motivated, cannot be accepted," the court 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 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," added the court.

The court, while clarifying that it was not making any comments on the merits of the complaint, noted that as per a Supreme Court decision, corruption was a plague which was not only contagious but if not controlled, spread like a fire in a jungle.

It added that the Lokpal Act was introduced to instill confidence in the public regarding the integrity of those holding high offices including the prime minister, and the bar on entertaining instances after the expiry of seven years cannot override the basic purpose for which the law was brought in.

In terms of provisions under Section 53 of the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013, a complaint cannot be made after the expiry of seven years from the date on which the offence mentioned in the complaint is alleged to have been committed.

"Section 53 of the Act and the timeline is only to prevent unnecessary harassment of the public servant but that cannot override the basic purpose for which the Act was brought in which is to prevent corruption in high offices," the court said.

"Corruption is opposed to democracy and social order, being not only anti-people, but aimed and targeted against them. It affects the economy and destroys the cultural heritage. Unless nipped in the bud at the earliest, it is likely to cause turbulence — shaking of the socio-economic-political system in an otherwise healthy, wealthy, effective and vibrating society," noted the court.

It said corruption was compared to HIV leading to AIDS, being incurable, and also termed as royal thievery, and as held by the apex court, the efficiency in public service would improve only when the public servant devotes his sincere attention to the performance of his duties.

Assailing the complaint as well as the Lokpal proceedings, Soren had argued before the high court that the case against him was "purely malafide" and "politically motivated".

He argued the complaint could not have been entertained by the anti-corruption ombudsman as the allegations pertained to a time which was seven years before the date of submission of the complaint.

In response, the Lokpal had said the proceedings were being conducted as per the law and the complaint was still “open to adjudication” as “no final view has been formed” and it “cannot comment on the merit of the complaint at this stage”.

It said the Lokpal was established to look into allegations of corruption against public functionaries in line with the country's commitment to the policy of “zero corruption”. A complaint, it said, need not be "rejected at threshold".

On September 12, 2022, the high court had stayed the Lokpal proceedings against Soren and said the matter required consideration.

(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)