On February 20, 2025, the Supreme Court intervened to stay a Lokpal decision asserting jurisdiction over a sitting High Court judge. The bench, comprising Justices BR Gavai, Surya Kant, and Abhay S Oka, expressed significant concern over the Lokpal's interpretation, describing it as "very disturbing."

The controversy arose from a January 27 order by the Lokpal, led by former Supreme Court Justice AM Khanwilkar, which posited that High Court judges fall under the purview of Section 14(1)(f) of the Lokpal Act. This section pertains to individuals in bodies established by an Act of Parliament. The Lokpal reasoned that since certain High Courts are constituted through parliamentary acts, their judges could be investigated under this provision.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta challenged this interpretation, asserting that the Lokpal was never intended to oversee High Court judges. Concurring, the Supreme Court bench emphasized that post-Constitution, High Court judges are constitutional authorities, not merely statutory functionaries.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal also criticized the Lokpal's stance, urging the Court to suspend its order. In response, the Supreme Court not only stayed the Lokpal's decision but also issued notices to the Union Government, the Registrar General of the Lokpal, and the original complainant. Additionally, the Court prohibited the disclosure of the judge's identity and the complaint's specifics.

This development raises pivotal questions about the boundaries of the Lokpal's authority and the mechanisms for judicial accountability within India's legal framework.