CJI NV Ramana said that they're going to hear a petition against the electoral bond scheme
07-04-2022
Chief Justice of India N V Ramana told Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who mentioned the matter Tuesday, that the court would have heard it earlier had it not been for Covid-19. “We will hear it,” the CJI said.
The Supreme Court has agreed to require up for hearing a pending plea challenging the Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018.
Chief Justice of India N V Ramana told Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who mentioned the matter Tuesday, that the court would have heard it earlier had it not been for Covid-19. “We will hear it,” the CJI said.
Seeking urgent hearing, Bhushan said there's news that an organization in Kolkata paid Rs 40 crore to avoid a raid. “It’s distorting democracy,” he contended.
The top court is seized of petitions filed by two NGOs — Common Cause and Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) — challenging the scheme.
The 20th tranche of electoral bonds opened available April 1 to April 10.
Last month, during a written reply in Rajya Sabha, Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary provided break-up of the sale of electoral bonds: Rs 1056.73 crore in 2018; Rs 5071.99 crore in 2019; Rs 363.96 crore in 2020; Rs 1502.29 crore in 2021; and Rs 1213.26 crore in 2022.
In 19 tranches since 2018, bonds worth Rs 9208.23 crore were sold. Political parties cashed bonds worth Rs 9187.55 crore.
The reply also stated that no bonds were sold to foriegn entities because the scheme doesn't allow this.
Electoral bonds are purchased by donors and are valid for 15 days from the date of issue. A document, these is bought by donors from a bank, and therefore the organization can then encash them. These will be redeemed only by an eligible party by depositing them in its designated account maintained with a bank.
The bonds are issued by SBI in denominations of Rs 1,000, Rs 10,000, Rs 1 lakh, Rs 10 lakh and Rs 1 crore.
In March 2021, the Supreme Court had dismissed ADR’s prayer to remain fresh sale of electoral bonds while an earlier petition it filed against the scheme is pending.
Disputing the NGO’s contention regarding “complete anonymity” of bond purchasers, the court said “it isn't like the operations under the Scheme are behind iron curtains incapable of being pierced”.
The court known that bonds had been issued within the past — in 2018, 2019 and 2020 — “without any impediment” and it had already ordered “certain safeguards” by way of an interim order on April 12, 2019.
In its April 2019 interim order, which also came on an application by ADR, the Supreme Court had directed political parties to “forthwith” submit details of those bonds to the commission. That order too had come on the petition filed by ADR in September 2017.
However, the NGO again approached the court, contending that the identity of the donors could never be known to the general public.
The court remarked the commission receiving details of contributions received through bonds, in pursuance of its April 2019 order, and said “we don't know at this stage on how far the allegation that under the Scheme, there would be complete anonymity within the financing of political parties by corporate houses, both in India and abroad, is sustainable”.
