The first Lokpal Annual Report (2019-20) recorded 1,427 complaints; FY 2023-24 saw about 5,500 complaints. Of these, only about 5-7% survived preliminary inquiry — most are dismissed for procedural defect, especially the missing or defective affidavit. The single biggest reason genuine corruption complaints fail is filing carelessness, not lack of evidence.

• Prime Minister — only with full Lokpal bench's consent; matters relating to international relations, security, public order, atomic energy and space excluded.
• Union Ministers and MPs — with safeguards on speech / vote within Parliament (Article 105).
• Chairpersons / Members of Boards / Commissions / autonomous bodies of the Central Government.
• Group A, B, C, D officers of the Central Government (since the 2016 amendment).
• Employees of any society / association / trust receiving central funding above ₹1 crore (foreign) or ₹10 crore (domestic, partly or wholly).
• Public servants of central PSUs.

The substantive offences are those listed in the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 (PC Act 1988) as amended in 2018:

• §7 — Public servant taking gratification.
• §8 — Taking gratification by influencing public servant.
• §9 — Taking gratification by other persons.
• §10 — Punishment for abetment.
• §11 — Public servant obtaining valuable thing.
• §13 — Criminal misconduct.
• §14 — Habitual offender.

• Chief Minister, state Ministers, MLAs, MLCs — with state-specific safeguards.
• State Government officers (Group A/B/C, in most states).
• Officers of municipal bodies, panchayats, state PSUs, state-funded universities and boards.

State coverage varies — Karnataka Lokayukta (under Karnataka Lokayukta Act 1984) is among the most active; MP Lokayukta (Lokayukta and Up-Lokayuktas Act 1981) similarly. Some states (e.g., West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh) have weaker / more recently-constituted Lokayuktas. Check <state>lokayukta.gov.in or the state's General Administration Department portal.

• Investigate judges of the higher judiciary — judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are excluded. The route is the Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968 + impeachment.
• Investigate anyone for non-corruption offences — Lokpal jurisdiction is corruption only. Murder, fraud, cheating, sexual offences go to police / EOW / Mahila Thana / regular criminal courts.
• Pass binding orders against private parties that didn't act with / aid a public servant.
• Re-open settled disputes older than 7 years from the alleged act (§53).
• Adjudicate policy decisions of government, however unwise (ONGC v. UoI (1991) principle).

• Be specific. Name, designation, posting, dates.
• Identify the underlying offence under PC Act 1988 §7 / §8 / §13 etc. — your advocate or DLSA panel lawyer can help map.
• Calculate limitation: must be within 7 years of the alleged act under §53. Continuing offence (e.g., kickbacks every month from a recurring contract) extends the clock.

• Documentary: bank statements, contract papers, file notings (often obtainable via prior RTI), tender documents, GST invoices, sting recordings (legal in India under Aniruddha Bahal v. State (2010) when whistleblower-driven).
• Witnesses: at least 1-2 willing to depose; their affidavits on stamp paper attached.
• Your own affidavit on ₹100 stamp paper — mandatory under Lokpal (Complaint) Rules 2020 — declaring every allegation true to your knowledge under penalty of perjury.

• Available at lokpal.gov.in → “File a Complaint” → “Form A”.
• Sections: complainant details (name, address, ID, contact); respondent details (name, designation, organisation, posting); allegations (numbered, dated, specific); supporting documents (numbered list); witnesses; declaration.
• Identity proof of complainant: Aadhaar / PAN / passport.
• Anonymous / pseudonymous complaints are not entertained under §53(2).

• In person: Office of the Lokpal of India, 6th Floor, Pt Deendayal Antyodaya Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003. Receipt issued.
• By Speed Post: same address.
• Online: lokpal.gov.in → “File Online Complaint” → register with email + OTP → upload Form A + affidavit (scanned) + documents (PDF).
• Filing fee: NIL.

• Within 30 days of receipt, Lokpal may either order a preliminary inquiry by its Inquiry Wing or refer to CBI / appropriate agency for verification.
• 90-day SLA for preliminary inquiry (extendable by another 90 days with reasons).
• The respondent public servant is given a chance to be heard — not before filing, but during the preliminary inquiry stage (Lalita Kumari principles applied).

• If prima facie corruption is established, Lokpal orders:
  • Investigation by its own Investigation Wing, OR
  • Reference to CBI (most common — CBI has investigative infrastructure), OR
  • Reference to the appropriate state / central agency.
• Investigation timeline: 6 months from order (extendable by 6 months at a time, total maximum 2 years).

• Prosecution sanction under §19 PC Act + §197 BNSS 2023 (corresponding to old §197 CrPC). Lokpal itself can grant prosecution sanction — bypassing the executive's earlier monopoly. Trial in Special Court (CBI court for central; designated session court for state).
• Departmental proceedings — direction to disciplinary authority for major / minor penalty.
• Closure with reasons.

• Form: same structure as Lokpal Form A (each state Lokayukta has its own form on its website — e.g., lokayukt.mp.gov.in, karnatakalokayukta.kar.nic.in).
• Affidavit on ₹100 stamp paper mandatory.
• Filing in person at Lokayukta office in state capital, by post, or online (where state has portal).
• Preliminary inquiry by Lokayukta's investigation wing (state police officers on deputation).
• Final report to the state government → action by Chief Secretary / disciplinary authority.

State Lokayukta SLAs vary. Karnataka has typically 6-9 months; MP similar; Maharashtra 9-15 months. Check the state Lokayukta's annual report.

+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Lokpal Form A (in person/post/    | NIL filing fee.                      |
| online)                           |                                      |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Complainant affidavit             | ₹100 stamp paper (mandatory).        |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Each witness affidavit            | ₹100 stamp paper recommended.        |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Identity proof of complainant     | Aadhaar / PAN / passport copy.       |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| State Lokayukta complaint         | Per state — usually NIL fee.         |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Limitation                        | 7 years from cause of action (§53).  |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Preliminary inquiry SLA           | 90 days (extendable +90).            |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Investigation SLA                 | 6 months (extendable +6, max 2 yrs). |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Lokpal prosecution sanction power | Lokpal Act §23 — bypasses executive  |
|                                   | sanction monopoly under §19 PC Act.  |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| RTI to Lokpal PIO / Lokayukta PIO | ₹10 by IPO. BPL = free.              |
| (compatible with proceedings)     |                                      |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Whistleblower protection          | Lokpal Act §35 + Whistle Blowers     |
|                                   | Protection Act 2014 (still partly    |
|                                   | unimplemented).                      |
+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+

• Defective affidavit. Single largest dismissal ground. Affidavit not on ₹100 stamp paper, not notarised, doesn't cover every allegation, signed in the wrong place — file is rejected at the threshold.
• General allegations without specifics. “He takes bribes” — dismissed. “On 14 March 2024, he took ₹3 lakh in cash at his official chamber as evidenced by [witness X]” — accepted for inquiry.
• No documentary evidence. Lokpal does not investigate on suspicion alone (§53(3)). Bring at least one document or witness affidavit.
• Time-barred. Complaint about a kickback paid in 2017 filed in 2026 → barred under §53. (Continuing offences extend; consult counsel.)
• Wrong forum. Allegations against a state Police Inspector → state Lokayukta, not Lokpal. Allegations against a District Collector for non-corruption administrative lapse → state Lokayukta or judicial review, not Lokpal (which is corruption-specific).
• Politically motivated complaint. Lokpal screens out complaints filed close to elections / containing political language. Keep tone neutral, factual.
• Anonymous complaint. Not entertained. Identity proof mandatory.
• Allegation against private party only (no public servant involved). Lokpal jurisdiction limited to public servants.
• Self-incriminating allegations without §35 whistleblower protection invoked. Discuss with counsel before filing if you yourself paid the bribe.

After 60 days of filing, a written letter to the named Inquiry Officer (if known) or the Registrar of Lokpal — quoting your complaint number + receipt date + statutory SLA. Often shakes a stuck file.

• Direct written grievance to the Chairperson — an internal review request.
• Many Lokayuktas (Karnataka, MP) have Chairperson grievance days — open to public on alternate Mondays, etc.

• pgportal.gov.in → DoPT → “Lokpal”.
• 30-day SLA. Less effective than direct Lokpal escalation but builds a paper trail.

• If Lokpal sits silent beyond extendable SLAs, a writ for “issuance of mandamus to Lokpal to inquire into Complaint No. ___” is maintainable in Supreme Court (Article 32) or High Court (Article 226).
• Vineet Narain v. UoI (1998) established the SC's supervisory jurisdiction over CBI; analogous principles to Lokpal inaction.
• Public-spirited NGOs and senior counsel often take such cases pro bono.

The Lokpal of India and every State Lokayukta are public authorities under §2(h) of the RTI Act 2005. There is no §24 exemption for Lokpal. The RTI Act fully applies.

RTI helps here when:

• You want to know status of your complaint, name of dealing officer, expected timeline — RTI to PIO Lokpal / Lokayukta gets you a written reply in 30 days.
• You want to know what action was taken post preliminary inquiry — RTI for the action-taken report (third-party information of the respondent may be redacted, but action taken on your file should be disclosed).
• You want statistical data — number of complaints received, dismissed, taken up, investigation pending. Annual reports cover this; RTI for missing years.
• Your complaint was dismissed and you want the dismissal noting — RTI for the file noting (your complaint, your information, your right).
• You want to coordinate evidence with the named Inquiry Officer — RTI is the cheapest way to find out who the IO is.

See foundational guide: RTI in 12 simple steps — for first-time filers.

RTI does NOT help here when:

• You want to substitute an RTI for a Lokpal complaint — RTI gets you records; it does not investigate corruption. The two are complementary, not interchangeable.
• You want a prosecution sanction through RTI — that is Lokpal's substantive function under §23 of the Lokpal Act.
• You want details of an ongoing investigation that would impede the inquiry — refused under §8(1)(h) RTI Act (information that would impede investigation).
• You want identity / personal details of the respondent's family — refused under §8(1)(j) (personal information unconnected to public activity).
• You want CBI internal investigation file — CBI is exempt under §24 RTI Act, except for matters of corruption and human rights violations (so you may get specific corruption file in some cases — frame the RTI carefully).

The honest framing: RTI is fully compatible with the Lokpal proceeding — both can run parallel. RTI is the cheapest tool to know what Lokpal is doing on your file. Lokpal is the legal forum that delivers the corruption investigation. Use both.

Q. Can I file a Lokpal complaint and a Lokayukta complaint on the same matter?
If the matter involves both central and state public servants, yes — split or coordinate. If it is purely state, file Lokayukta. If purely central, file Lokpal. Filing both for the same allegation against the same official can lead to one being dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Q. Is the affidavit really mandatory? Can't I just file a sworn statement before Lokpal?
Yes, mandatory under Lokpal (Complaint) Rules 2020 + §53. Affidavit on ₹100 non-judicial stamp paper, notarised. The cost (~₹150-300 with notary) is small; the absence is fatal.

Q. Will the public servant know I filed against him?
At the preliminary inquiry stage, the respondent gets notice and a chance to be heard (§20(3)). Anonymity is not preserved. §35 of the Lokpal Act + the Whistle Blowers Protection Act 2014 provide protection from victimisation, though enforcement of the latter is patchy.

Q. What if my complaint is found to be false?
Under §46 of the Lokpal Act, knowingly false / frivolous / vexatious complaints attract imprisonment up to 1 year + fine up to ₹1 lakh. Don't file what you cannot substantiate. Honest complaints with evidence — even if unsuccessful — do not attract this.

Q. Can a journalist / NGO / activist file on behalf of an aggrieved person?
Yes. Lokpal jurisprudence accepts public-spirited complaints. The complainant's identity is what matters; the underlying grievance can affect a third party.

Q. How does Lokpal differ from CVC (Central Vigilance Commission)?
CVC (under CVC Act 2003) supervises vigilance work in central organisations and recommends action. Lokpal can directly investigate, grant prosecution sanction, and pass orders. CVC's recommendations need the executive's acceptance; Lokpal's prosecution sanction does not. The two coordinate but Lokpal is more powerful.

Q. My complaint is against a Group D peon who took ₹500 to issue a file. Worth Lokpal?
Technically within jurisdiction, but Lokpal prioritises higher-impact cases. For petty bribery, CVO of the department + CPGRAMS is faster. Lokpal will likely refer it back.

Q. Does Lokpal have power over judges of the High Court?
No — judges of the higher judiciary are outside Lokpal's jurisdiction (§14(1)(a) excludes them). Route is Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968 + parliamentary impeachment. Subordinate judiciary is dealt with by the High Court's vigilance under Article 235.

Q. Can I withdraw my Lokpal complaint?
You can request withdrawal — but Lokpal can continue suo motu under §20(1) if the case has prima facie merit. Withdrawal is not a right.

Q. Lokpal hasn't replied for 2 years. What can I actually do?
(i) Polite reminder + RTI to PIO Lokpal for status. (ii) Written representation to Chairperson. (iii) CPGRAMS to DoPT. (iv) Article 32 writ in SC for mandamus. (v) Press / journalists — public attention often unfreezes files.

• RTI for FIR not registered — copy-ready template
• How to apply for free legal aid (NALSA / DLSA) — complete 2026 guide
• RTI in 12 simple steps — for first-time filers
• All Indian government helplines — one master directory
• RTI forms + state-wise fee chart

Last reviewed: 26 April 2026 by RTI Wiki editorial team. Lokpal procedural rules and state Lokayukta thresholds change occasionally — verify on lokpal.gov.in or your state Lokayukta portal before filing. Write to admin@bighelpers.in if you spot a stale figure.