SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.A. BOBDE, CJI., A.S. BOPANNA, V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, JJ.
Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 333 of 2015, Interlocutory Application No.183625 of 2019 And Interlocutory Application No.36653 of 2021 In Writ Petition (C) No.880 of 2017
Decided On : 26-03-2021
Constitution of India – Article 32 – Public Interest Litigation – Challenge to constitutionality and validity of (i) Section 135 of the Finance Act 2017 and corresponding amendment carried out in Section 31 of Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, (ii) Section 137 of Finance Act, 2017, and corresponding amendment carried out in Section 29C of Representation of People Act, 1951 (iii) Section 11 of Finance Act, 2017 and corresponding amendment carried out in Section 13A, Income Tax Act, 1961 (iv) Section 154 of Finance Act, 2017 and corresponding amendment carried out in Section 182 of Companies Act, 2013 and (v) Section 236 of Finance Act, 2016 and corresponding amendment carried out in Section 2(1)(j)(vi) of Foreign Regulations Contribution Act, 2010 – There cannot be repeated applications seeking same relief, merely because interim reliefs sought, relates to something that is to happen at periodical intervals of time – Under Clause 8(1) of Electoral Bonds Scheme, 2018 bonds under Scheme are made available for purchase, for a period of 10 days each in months of January, April, July and October – Therefore, once this Court has passed an Order on 12.4.2019 directing some interim arrangement, thereafter applications for same interim relief cannot be made, every time window for purchase under Scheme is opened – Most of recommendations of RBI have been accepted and incorporated in Scheme – Despite the fact that Scheme provides anonymity, Scheme is intended to ensure that everything happens only through banking channels – While identity of purchaser of bond is withheld, it is ensured that unidentified/ unidentifiable persons cannot purchase bonds and give it to political parties – A non-KYC compliant application or an application not meeting requirements of scheme shall be rejected – If purchase of bonds as well as their encashment could happen only through banking channels and if purchase of bonds are allowed only to customers who fulfill KYC norms, information about purchaser will certainly be available with SBI which alone is authorised to issue and encash bonds as per Scheme – No justification for grant of stay at this stage – Both applications for stay dismissed. (Paras 10, 16, 17, 18, 22 and 28)
Facts of the case:
Writ petitioners have come up with a fresh application in I.A. No.36653 of 2021 seeking an interim direction to the respondents not to open any further window for sale of Electoral Bonds under the Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018 and to prevent respondents from any further sale of Electoral Bonds. This application is filed on the premise that the window for the sale of fresh bonds is likely to be opened at present on April 1, 2021.
Findings of Court:
Apprehension that foreign corporate houses may buy bonds and attempt to influence the electoral process in the country, is also misconceived. Under Clause 3 of the Scheme, the Bonds may be purchased only by a person, who is a citizen of India or incorporated or established in India.
Result : Applications for stay dismissed.
ORDER :
1. The Association for Democratic Reforms and Common Cause have joined together and come up with the above Public Interest Litigation praying for the:
“(a) Issue a writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ declaring ---
(i) Section 135 of the Finance Act 2017 and the corresponding amendment carried out in Section 31 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934,
(ii) Section 137 of the Finance Act, 2017, and the corresponding amendment carried out in Section 29C of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
(iii) Section 11 of the Finance Act, 2017 and the corresponding amendment carried out in Section 13A, the Income Tax Act, 1961
(iv) Section 154 of the Finance Act, 2017 and the corresponding amendment carried out in Section 182 of the Companies Act, 2013 and
(v) Section 236 of Finance Act, 2016 and the corresponding amendment carried out in Section 2(1)(j)(vi) of the Foreign Regulations Contribution Act, 2010 as being unconstitutional, illegal and void.
(b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing that no political parties would accept any donation in cash.”
2. On 3.10.2017, notice was ordered in the writ petition and the writ petition was directed to be tagged along with Writ Petition (C) No.333 of 2015 and Special Leave Petition (C) No.18190 of 2014. Though Writ Petition (C) No.333 of 2015 was also by the Association for Democratic Reforms and another person, the reliefs sought therein were little different. The prayers made in the said writ petition were for (i) a declaration that all national and regional political parties are public authorities under the Right to Information Act, 2005; (ii) a direction to the Election Commission of India to collect all information concerning the finances of political parties; (iii) a direction to all national and regional political parties to mandatorily disclose complete details about their income, expenditure, donations and funding as well as full details of the donors.
3. On 12.4.2019 this Court passed an interim order in common in Writ Petition (C) Nos.333 of 2015, 880 of 2017 and two other writ petitions. Paragraphs 11 to 15 of the said interim order read as follows:
“xxxx xxxx xxxx
11. We have considered the matter including the amendments in the different statutes brought in by the Finance Act, 2016 and 2017. We have closely examined the stand taken by the respective parties including what has been stated by the Election Commission of India in the affidavit filed, details of which have been setout. All that we would like to state for the present is that the rival contentions give rise to weighty issues which have a tremendous bearing on the sanctity of the electoral process in the country. Such weighty issues would require an in depth hearing which cannot be concluded and the issues answered within the limited time that is available before the process of funding through the electoral Bonds comes to a closure, as per the schedule noted earlier.
12. The court, therefore, has to ensure that any interim arrangement that may be made would not tilt the balance in favour of either of the parties but that the same ensures adequate safeguards against the competing claims of the parties which are yet to be adjudicated.
13. In the above perspective, according to us, the just and proper interim direction would be to require all the political parties who have received donations through electoral Bonds to submit to the Election Commission of India in sealed cover, detailed particulars of the donors as against the each Bond; the amount of each such bond and the full particulars of the credit received against each bond, namely, the particulars of the bank account to which the amount has been credited and the date of each such credit.
14. The above details will be furnished forthwith in respect of Electoral Bonds received by a political party till date. The details of such other bonds that may be received by such a political party upto the date fixed for issuing such bonds
There cannot be repeated applications seeking same relief, merely because interim reliefs sought, relates to something that is to happen at periodical intervals of time.
(1) Constitutional validity of Electoral Bond Scheme – Companies and individuals cannot be equated for the purpose of political contributions – Companies and individuals cannot be equated for the pur....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the non-disclosure of information regarding political party funding under the Electoral Bond Scheme violated citizens' right to information un....
The court ruled that the Electoral Bond Scheme is unconstitutional, emphasizing the need to exhaust normal legal remedies before invoking Article 32 for judicial intervention.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for complete disclosure of details related to Electoral Bonds purchased and contributions received by political parties under the E....
Writ of mandamus - Election - Writ of mandamus in favour of a person, the person claiming, must establish his legal right in himself - Then only a writ of mandamus could be issued against a person, w....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.