SC junks petition demanding review of verdict declaring poll bond scheme unconstitutional

The Supreme Court dismissed a petition seeking a review of its verdict declaring the electoral bonds scheme unconstitutional. The scheme allowed individuals and companies to make unlimited anonymous donations to favoured political parties.

“Having perused the review petitions, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. The review petitions are, therefore, dismissed,” a five-judge Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud said in its September 25 order made public on Saturday.

Advocate Mathews Nedumpara and another petitioner had sought review of the February 15 verdict delivered in the run up to the 2024 General Election, that had also directed the SBI to furnish details of electoral bonds to the Election Commission for making them public.

Noting that voters had the right to know, the five-judge Constitution Bench had said electoral bonds scheme violated Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution which guaranteed right to freedom of speech and expression and included right to information within its ambit. “We are of the opinion that the information about funding to a political party is essential for a voter to exercise their freedom to vote in an effective manner,” the court had said.

The Beach — which also included Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra — had said the disclosure of information regarding electoral bonds was necessary to identify corruption and quid pro quo transactions in governance. “Such information is also necessary for exercising an informed vote,” it had said.

Maintaining that “the integrity of the electoral process is a necessary concomitant to the maintenance of the democratic form of government,” the Bench said: “While quid pro quo and clientelistic corruption erodes quality and integrity of government decision making, the power of money may also pose threat to the electoral process itself.”

An electoral bond is a bearer instrument like a promissory note which can be purchased by an Indian citizen or an Indian company whose identity would remain secret from everybody except the SBI from whom it has to be purchased. Once purchased, the buyer can give it to a political party, which could encash it using its bank account.

In its PIL filed in 2017, ‘Association for Democratic Reforms’ (ADR) had alleged corruption and subversion of democracy through illicit and foreign funding of political parties and lack of transparency in their accounts. Besides ADR, CPM and ‘Common Cause’ had also challenged the scheme.