India's Lokpal Act Covers the Prime Minister, Ministers, MPs and Central Staff of Every Grade, and the Ombudsman Had Disposed of 2,350 Registered Complaints by January 2025

The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 received the President’s assent on 1 January 2014, and a notification of 16 January 2014 brought it into force, a date the Supreme Court recorded in 2017. It created the Lokpal, an ombudsman set up by statute to inquire into corruption complaints against the Prime Minister, Union ministers, members of Parliament and central government employees. The Lokpal has worked since March 2019. In a written Rajya Sabha reply in February 2025, the Minister of State for Personnel said 2,426 complaints had been registered under regular numbers and 2,350 disposed of, as of 31 January 2025, according to PTI.

This article sets out who the Act reaches, how a complaint moves through it and what the published figures show. The Right to Information Act is the citizen’s tool for asking to see records. The Lokpal handles allegations of corruption against named officials.

Who the Lokpal can inquire into

Section 14 lists the people it covers. They are anyone who is or has been a Prime Minister, a Union minister or a member of either House of Parliament, and officers and staff of the Union in Groups A, B, C and D, which are the grades of the central services. It also covers heads and staff of bodies created by an Act of Parliament or funded or controlled by the Centre. Directors and officers of societies and trusts are included if the government finances them above an income threshold, or if they receive foreign donations above Rs 10 lakh a year under the foreign contribution law. The Act applies to public servants in and outside India. Armed forces personnel who fall under the Army, Air Force, Navy and Coast Guard Acts are outside it (Section 2).

The Prime Minister has extra protection. The Lokpal cannot inquire into allegations that touch international relations, external and internal security, public order, atomic energy or space. Any inquiry needs the full bench to consider it and two-thirds of the members to approve it, and it is held in camera. If the Lokpal dismisses the complaint, the records are not published.

Two limits apply to everyone. Section 14(2) bars inquiry into a member of Parliament over anything said or voted in the House, which Article 105(2) of the Constitution protects (see our guide to the Constitution at a glance). Section 53 bars inquiry into a complaint made more than seven years after the alleged offence.

Filing a complaint

A complaint has to be made “in such form as may be prescribed” (Section 2). The Lokpal (Complaint) Rules, 2020 were notified in the Gazette on 2 March 2020, and the Ministry of Personnel announced them in the Lok Sabha on 11 March 2020. Until 13 December 2021 the Lokpal accepted complaints by post, e-mail or hand. On that date its Chairperson inaugurated LokpalOnline, a portal where a complainant can file from anywhere and track the complaint, with e-mail and SMS alerts and the complainant’s identity kept confidential, according to the Press Information Bureau.

The form has been a recurring issue. ThePrint reported in March 2022 that the Lokpal had decided to examine even complaints in the wrong format, and gave the volume of complaints received and the number in the prescribed format: 1,427 and 45 in 2019-20, 2,355 and 110 in 2020-21, and 4,244 and 128 in 2021-22 up to February 2022. A circular of 5 June 2025 reversed that. It said complaints not in the prescribed form “shall not be entertained at any level,” PTI reported, and added that the Act gives the Lokpal no express power to review its own orders.

Section 46 protects public servants from misuse. A false, frivolous or vexatious complaint can bring up to one year in prison and a fine of up to Rs 1 lakh, though complaints made in good faith are exempt.

From complaint to charge sheet

Section 20 sets the timetable. On receiving a complaint, the Lokpal can order a preliminary inquiry by its Inquiry Wing or by any agency, including the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), to see whether a prima facie case exists, meaning one that looks sound enough on the evidence to proceed. The agency collects comments from the public servant and the department concerned and reports back within 60 days. Complaints against Group A to D employees can be referred to the Central Vigilance Commission, which reports on Group A and B cases to the Lokpal and handles Group C and D cases under its own law.

A bench of at least three members then hears the public servant and decides whether to order an investigation, recommend departmental action or close the case. A preliminary inquiry should ordinarily finish within 90 days, with another 90 for recorded reasons. An investigation should finish within six months, extendable by six months at a time. On the investigation report, a three-member bench can grant sanction to file a charge sheet, which Section 23 makes the Lokpal’s power. Special Courts are meant to finish trials in a year, or two at most with recorded reasons (Section 35). The Lokpal can also provisionally attach the proceeds of corruption for up to 90 days (Section 29), and a Special Court decides whether to confirm that. The Lokpal’s website must show how many complaints are pending and disposed of (Section 20).

How the Lokpal came to be appointed

The Supreme Court, quoting the Act’s Statement of Objects, noted that the Administrative Reforms Commission recommended a Lokpal in 1966, that eight Lokpal Bills were later introduced in the Lok Sabha, and that India deposited its instrument ratifying the UN Convention against Corruption on 9 May 2011. The Rajya Sabha passed the 2013 Bill on 17 December and the Lok Sabha passed it by voice vote on 18 December, as The Tribune reported. Part III of the Act asks every state to set up a Lokayukta, the state counterpart, within a year of commencement.

Section 4 sets out who picks the Lokpal. The selection committee is the Prime Minister, the Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, the Chief Justice of India or a judge the Chief Justice nominates, and an eminent jurist the President nominates. In 2017 the Attorney General told the Court that the Speaker had recognised no Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and that an amendment Bill introduced on 18 December 2014 was pending. On 27 April 2017 a bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Navin Sinha held that the Act was “an eminently workable piece of legislation.” They said a committee without the Leader of the Opposition could still pick the jurist and recommend names.

The President signed the warrants of appointment on 19 March 2019. Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose, a former Supreme Court judge, took charge as Chairperson on 23 March and the eight members, four of them judicial, on 27 March, the Press Information Bureau records. The Act allows up to eight members besides the Chairperson, with at least half of all members from the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, minorities and women. Justice A. M. Khanwilkar, also a former Supreme Court judge, has chaired since 10 March 2024, The Wire reports. The February 2025 Rajya Sabha reply listed six members besides the Chairperson, three of them judicial. Under Section 42 the Comptroller and Auditor General audits the Lokpal’s accounts, an office we describe in how India audits its own government.

What the numbers show

Counts differ by source because they measure different things. The Rajya Sabha reply’s 2,426 counts complaints given a regular complaint number. The 2019 to 2022 figures above count everything received. For later years, a written Lok Sabha reply by the Minister of State for Personnel, reported by The Pioneer on 26 March 2026, gave registered and disposed complaints of 166 and 161 in 2023-24, 292 and 260 in 2024-25, and 389 and 336 in 2025-26 up to February 2026. A report of a parliamentary standing committee tabled on 16 March 2026 gave 318 registered and 288 disposed from April to December 2025, The Wire reports.

On outcomes, ThePrint reviewed the Lokpal’s website in July 2025. The site’s statistics showed 34 investigations ordered and seven prosecution sanctions. Among 620 final orders from January 2023 onward, ThePrint counted five sanctions, three of them involving bank officials. The Lokpal’s office told ThePrint the analysis might not be entirely accurate and said the website carries only final orders.

The two wings and the annual report

Sections 11 and 12 require an Inquiry Wing and a Prosecution Wing, each under a director. Until they exist, the Centre must lend officers, and the CVC and CBI do the work. The Lokpal constituted its Prosecution Wing on 6 June 2025. The CBI still conducts prosecutions, according to the committee report that The Wire summarised. For the Inquiry Wing, the Department of Expenditure has cleared 70 regular posts, but the director had not been appointed when the committee reported. The Lokpal’s sanctioned strength was 65 posts, 24 of them vacant. In March 2025 the 145th report of the same parliamentary committee asked the government to set up both wings, preferably within six months, PTI reported.

Section 48 requires an annual report to the President, who lays it before both Houses of Parliament. The Ministry of Personnel said in March 2020 that no report existed yet because the Lokpal began work at the end of March 2019. The Wire reports that reports for 2019-20 to 2021-22 were presented to the President, and that on 18 November 2025 the full bench decided to post a combined report for 2022-23 and 2023-24 and one for 2024-25. Parliament’s winter session opened in December 2025 without them being tabled.

Assets, judges and what the courts are deciding

The Lokpal and Lokayuktas (Amendment) Act, 2016, assented to on 29 July 2016 and deemed in force from 16 January 2014, replaced Section 44. The original required annual asset returns by 31 July and publication on ministry websites by 31 August. The new text says every public servant shall declare assets and liabilities in the form and manner prescribed.

A second question is before the Supreme Court. In an order of 27 January 2025 the Lokpal held that a High Court judge falls within Section 14(1)(f), because the High Court in question was created by an Act of Parliament. It did not examine the allegations and forwarded the complaint to the Chief Justice of the High Court. On 20 February 2025 a bench of Justices B. R. Gavai, Surya Kant and Abhay S. Oka took up the matter on its own and stayed the order. On 18 March 2025 it appointed Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar as amicus curiae, and the Solicitor General for the Union and senior advocates Kapil Sibal and B. H. Marlapalle argued against the Lokpal’s reading. On 30 April 2025 the bench placed the case before the Chief Justice of India, LiveLaw reported. It is registered as SMW(C) No. 2 of 2025.