Anantam IASCurrent Affairs · 26 October 2025

Lokpal

Study Guides · Study Notes · Constitutional and Statutory Bodies · General Studies · Indian Polity

Why in the News? 

While the Lokpal’s decision to float a tender for seven luxury cars has triggered public outrage, the anti-graft body’s performance record shows a sharp decline in public engagement.

UPSC Relevance 

GS2, Statutory, Regulatory and various Quasi-judicial Bodies.

These statutory bodies are often asked in Prelims

PYQ

2013 – ‘A national Lokpal, however strong it may be, cannot resolve the problems of immorality in public affairs’. Discuss.

2025 Prelims

Consider the following statements about Lokpal:

I. The power of Lokpal applies to public servants of India, but not to the Indian public servants posted outside India.

II. The Chairperson or a Member shall not be a Member of the Parliament or a Member of the Legislature of any State or Union Territory, and only the Chief Justice of India, whether incumbent or retired, has to be its Chairperson.

III. The Chairperson or a Member shall not be a person of less than forty-five years of age on the date of assuming office as the Chairperson or Member, as the case may be.

IV. Lokpal cannot inquire into the allegations of corruption against a sitting Prime Minister of India.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. III only
  2. II and III
  3. I and IV
  4. None of the above statements is correct

Lokpal

The Lokpal is the central ombudsman for anti-corruption in India, established as a statutory body under The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 to inquire into and investigate allegations of corruption against certain public functionaries at the Union (Central) level and  ensure transparency, accountability, and integrity in public administration.

Objective and Scope (Section 1):

Timeline 

Definitions (Section2) and Jurisdiction (Section 14):

Appointment

The Chairperson and Members are appointed by the President of India by warrant under their hand and seal, based on the recommendations of a Selection Committee consisting of: 

  1. Prime Minister (Chairperson)
  2. Speaker of the House of the People (Lok Sabha)
  3. Leader of Opposition in the House of the People (or the leader of the single largest Opposition party)
  4. Chief Justice of India (or a Supreme Court Judge nominated by the CJI)
  5. One eminent jurist, nominated by the President on the recommendation of the other four members.

The Selection Committee also constitutes a Search Committee to prepare a panel of suitable persons for consideration.

Composition

RoleComposition DetailsEligibility Criteria
Chairperson1 ChairpersonMust be or have been one of the following: * Chief Justice of India * Judge of the Supreme Court * An eminent person of impeccable integrity and outstanding ability, having special knowledge and expertise of not less than 25 years in matters relating to anti-corruption policy, public administration, vigilance, law, etc.
MembersMaximum 8 Members.Minimum 50% must be Judicial Members. Minimum 50% of the total Members must be from amongst the persons belonging to SC/ST/OBC/Minorities and women.
Judicial MemberUp to 4 Judicial MembersMust be or have been one of the following: * Judge of the Supreme Court * Chief Justice of a High Court
Non-Judicial MemberUp to 4 Non-Judicial MembersMust be a person of impeccable integrity and outstanding ability, having special knowledge and expertise of not less than 25 years in matters relating to anti-corruption policy, public administration, vigilance, finance (including insurance and banking), law, and management.
Common Disqualifications–Must not be: * Less than 45 years of age on the date of assuming office. * A Member of Parliament or a Member of a State/Union Territory Legislature. * A Member of any Panchayat or Municipality. * A person convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude. * A person who has been removed or dismissed from service of the Union or a State. * A person who holds any office of trust or profit (other than his office as Chairperson or Member of Lokpal) or is affiliated with any political party or carries on any business or profession.

Term and Tenure

Salary and Conditions of Service

RoleEquivalent to
ChairpersonThe Chief Justice of India
Other MembersA Judge of the Supreme Court

Wings of Lokpal (Sections 11-12):

Powers of Lokpal (Sections 25-34):

Miscellaneous:

Preliminary Inquiry (Section 20)

  1. Receipt and Initial Decision: On receiving a complaint, the Lokpal decides whether to proceed further.
  2. Referral: If it proceeds, the Lokpal orders a preliminary inquiry by its own Inquiry Wing or refers the matter to an external agency like the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) or the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) to ascertain if a prima facie case exists.
Public Servant GroupPreliminary Inquiry (PI) AuthorityRole of Lokpal
Groups A and B (Senior Officials)Conducted by the CVC or the Lokpal’s own Inquiry Wing.The CVC sends the PI report to the Lokpal. The Lokpal then decides on further action (investigation, closure, or departmental proceedings).
Groups C and D (Junior Officials)The Lokpal refers the complaint to the CVC.The CVC is empowered to proceed with the inquiry and take action under the CVC Act, but is subject to reporting and review by the Lokpal.
  1. Report and Hearing: The Inquiry Wing/agency conducts the inquiry and submits a report to the Lokpal, usually within 90 days. A bench of not less than three Lokpal Members considers this report and, after giving the public servant an opportunity to be heard, decides whether a prima facie case for investigation exists.

Investigation (Section 20)

  1. Direction to Investigate: If a prima facie case is established, the Lokpal directs an agency (like the CBI) to conduct a full investigation.The Lokpal has powers of superintendence and direction over the investigating agency for the cases referred by it.
  2. Timeframe: The investigation is to be completed within 6 months (extendable).
  3. Final Report and Action: Upon receiving the investigation report, the Lokpal bench, after obtaining comments from the competent authority and the public servant, may:
    • Grant sanction to file a charge-sheet (prosecution) before a Special Court.
    • Direct the competent authority to initiate departmental proceedings or other appropriate action.
    • Direct the closure of the report.

Removal (Section 37)

The Chairperson or any Member of the Lokpal can be removed from office by the President of India as per the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.

  1. Removal on the Ground of Misbehaviour
    1. Grounds: Proven misbehaviour (which includes a conflict of interest, such as being involved in a government contract) or incapacity.
    2. Procedure:
      1. A petition is signed by at least 100 Members of Parliament (MPs) and submitted to the President.
      2. The President then refers the matter to the Supreme Court of India for inquiry.
      3. The Supreme Court conducts the inquiry and submits its findings to the President.
      4. If the Supreme Court, after inquiry, reports that the person should be removed on the ground of misbehaviour or incapacity, the President issues an order for their removal.
  2. Immediate Removal by the President– The President can also issue an order to remove the Chairperson or a Member directly on the following grounds, without the Supreme Court inquiry procedure:
    • If the person is adjudged an insolvent (bankrupt).
    • If the person engages, during their term of office, in any paid employment outside the duties of their office.
    • If the person is, in the opinion of the President, unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body.
    • If the person is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for an offence that, in the opinion of the President, involves moral turpitude.

Shortcomings

ShortcomingExplanation
1. Delayed OperationalizationLack of Political Will: The Lokpal Act was passed in 2013, but the first Chairperson and members were appointed only in March 2019, a delay of over five years. This enormous time lag effectively defeated the original momentum and public mandate behind the anti-corruption movement.
2. Low Disposal Rate of ComplaintsDespite receiving thousands of complaints, the number of cases pursued to a final stage is very low. As of late 2025, out of a total of over 6,900 complaints received since its inception, most complaints have been dismissed on technicalities. Preliminary Inquiries were ordered in just 289 cases while the Prosecution Sanctions were granted in just 7 cases.
3. Decline in Public EngagementThe number of complaints received by the Lokpal has reportedly sharply declined from a peak of around 2,469 in 2022-23 to just 233 subsequently (up to September 2025). Of the total 6,955 complaints received to date, 90% (6,264) were received in the first four years of its establishment (until 2023). This drop suggests waning public confidence in the body’s effectiveness.
4. Lack of Independent InfrastructureThe institution has faced severe delays in setting up its core operational wings. The Lokpal’s Prosecution Wing—a critical body for taking corruption cases to court—was reportedly notified only in June 2025, over a decade after the Act was passed. It also lacked a permanent office for years.
5. Political Influence in AppointmentsAlthough the Selection Committee is high-powered, the absence of a recognized Leader of the Opposition (LoP) for a period created a legal vacuum. The subsequent 2016 amendment (allowing the leader of the single largest opposition party to be a member) was an improvement, but the overall process still raises concerns about the selection criteria for “eminent jurists” and “persons of integrity,” leading to fears of political bias.
6. Limited Jurisdiction on High-Profile CasesThe Lokpal’s authority over the Prime Minister is restricted, as it cannot inquire into allegations relating to international relations, security, public order, atomic energy, and space. Furthermore, the Judiciary is completely excluded from its jurisdiction, creating a significant loophole for accountability.
7. Lack of Protection for ComplainantsThe Act’s provision for launching an inquiry against a complainant if the accused public servant is found innocent can deter people from filing genuine complaints due to the fear of harassment and retribution. The Whistleblower Protection Act itself lacks strong, concrete immunity.
8. Perceived ExtravaganceThe institution has occasionally drawn public scrutiny for perceived unnecessary expenditure. In October 2025, the Lokpal floated a tender to procure seven BMW 3 Series luxury cars for its members, which drew public criticism as an extravagance for an anti-corruption body meant to uphold simplicity and integrity.

Reforms 

Reform AreaSuggestionExamples
Selection ProcessBroaden the ‘Eminent Jurist’ selection by making the process more transparent and consultative. The Search Committee’s work should be public, and the Selection Committee must select from the recommended panel to minimize political bias.Sweden’s Parliamentary Ombudsman is directly elected by the Riksdag (Parliament), ensuring cross-party consensus and strong legislative backing, rather than solely executive appointment.
Financial IndependenceDeclare the Lokpal’s budget as a ‘charged expenditure’ on the Consolidated Fund of India (like the Supreme Court or Comptroller and Auditor General). This prevents the Executive from manipulating funds, ensuring timely and adequate resources.Constitutional bodies in India (e.g., CAG) have charged expenditure to guarantee their independence from the annual government vote.
Institutional StaffingEstablish the Inquiry and Prosecution Wings permanently with dedicated, independent, and high-quality staff, minimizing reliance on officers seconded from government departments (who may have conflicts of interest).Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) maintains its own dedicated, highly trained operational, investigative, and prevention branches, ensuring functional self-sufficiency.
Jurisdictional ClarityRemove subjective restrictions on investigating the Prime Minister for issues like “public order” or “security.” The Lokpal must be fully empowered to investigate corruption allegations at the highest levels, with in-camera proceedings for sensitive information.South Africa’s Public Protector has a broad constitutional mandate to investigate all organs of state, with a focus on high-profile public accountability cases, setting a powerful precedent.
Whistleblower ProtectionAmend the Lokpal Act to fully integrate strong, separate immunity for complainants/whistleblowers, eliminating the provision that allows inquiry against a complainant if the accused is found innocent.The Whistleblower Protection Act needs to be strongly enforced in India, ensuring zero risk of retribution, a practice common in many OECD countries.
Disposal RateShift focus from technical compliance to substantive justice. The Lokpal must develop clear, streamlined rules for preliminary investigation, reducing the number of cases dismissed on minor technicalities like incorrect complaint format.Karnataka’s Lokayukta (India), during its effective phase, was noted for its proactive and focused investigations against high-ranking officials, leading to tangible results.