NE NEWS SERVICE
NEW DELHI, AUG 24
“Why doesn’t the Government of India form a committee to study this issue?” CJI Ramana asked. The case before the Supreme Court on freebies promised by political parties before elections will now be heard by a Bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud. Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana, who was hearing the matter thus far, ordered for the same on Wednesday, according to the Bar and Bench report.
During today’s hearing, in line with previous suggestions for the formation of a committee to deliberate on the issue, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh suggested,
“I was suggesting a retired Supreme Court judge head the committee like Justice Lodha…”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta replied, “I think a Constitutional body should head the committee to deliberate.”
CJI Ramana then asked, “Why doesn’t the Government of India form a committee to study this issue?”
SG Mehta replied that the Central government will help in every way, and that the committee can submit a report on the issue in three months.
Questioning what can be defined as a freebie, Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for the Election Commission, asked, “If something is there in manifesto, can it be called a freebie? There is enough material available to judge the economic impact of freebies.”
CJI Ramana went on to observe,”Who is in opposition today can come into power tomorrow and they will have to manage this. So things like freebies etc which can destroy the economy. It has to be looked at and I just cannot pass a mandamus. Thus, there needs to be a debate.”
Singh then submitted that the Supreme Court’s 2013 judgment in Subramanian Balaji v. Govt of Tamil Nadu needs to be reconsidered. In that judgment, the Court had held that promises made by political parties in the election manifesto would not amount to ‘corrupt practices’ as per Section 123 of the Representation of People Act. It further held that the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) cannot dictate how governments spend their money, and that the Court cannot make guidelines or laws on what election promises should be allowed.
At this point, CJI Ramana said, “I will be constituting a three judge bench to hear this led by Justice DY Chandrachud.”
The Court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by BJP leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking directions to the Central government and the Election Commission to take steps to regulate poll manifestos of political parties and to parties accountable for promises made in such manifestos.
The plea by Upadhyay has opposed the practice of political parties giving/promising freebies to voters.
Up until now, various political parties and leaders have opposed the plea. The Aam Aadmi Party has stated that the plea by BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay is a “political interest litigation.”
Congress leader Dr. Jaya Thakur has submitted that it is the duty of the government to uplift weaker sections of the society and framing schemes and providing subsidies for the same is the duty of ruling parties which run the government.
அல்லது நாங்கள் சொல்வதை மட்டும் செய்யுங்கள் ஆனால் நாங்கள் செய்யும் காரியங்களை செய்யாதீர்கள் என அவர்கள் கூறுவதாக புரிந்து கொள்வதா? 🤔
— Office of PTR (@OfficeOfPTR) August 23, 2022
On the last date of hearing, the Court took an unfavourable view of the comments made by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party representative on television debates regarding the top court hearing the case on freebies.
Tamil Nadu Finance Minister Palanivel Thiagarajan had said on a TV debate that there was no Constitutional basis for courts to enter into the domain of economic policy.
