Justice M B Lokur takes different route to reach same findings

Justice Madan B Lokur, part of a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court monitoring Coalgate scam, took a technically "different route" in arriving at a concurring view with two other judges that prior approval of the government was not required to investigate top bureaucrats in a court-monitored probe into a corruption case.
Justice Lokur, in a separate order, relied on the powers conferred on the court under Article 32 of the Constitution to conclude that CBI can go ahead with an inquiry in a court-monitored probe against senior officials without taking the route of Section 6A of the DSPE Act which mandates prior sanction.

"Section 6A of the Act must be meaningfully and realistically read only as an injunction to the executive and not as an injunction to a constitutional court monitoring an investigation under Article 32 of the Constitution in an exercise of judicial review and of issuing a continuing mandamus," he said.
In his 25-page order, Justice Lokur gave reasons for arriving at the findings which was different from justices R M Lodha and Kurian Joseph who took the route of Article 142 of the Constitution that empowers the apex court to take any decision necessary for delivering the justice.