The bench emphasized the silence in the plea regarding compliance steps, highlighting the need for transparency and diligence in fulfilling court orders.
The Supreme Court on Monday (11th March) , dismissed State Bank of India’s petition for an extension to present the electoral bonds. The apex court mandated that the documents detailing the same are to be presented to the Election Commission of India by the end of today’s business hours.
The electoral poll bond scheme was introduced by the Centre in its 2017 Financial Bill, a move that faced a challenge from NGO ADR in the same year. Despite the legal challenge, the Central Government proceeded with its scheme. On October 16, 2023, the model was referred to a five-judge constitution bench, which unanimously invalidated it. The State Bank of India was tasked with providing detailed documentation on the scheme by March 4th, prompting the organization to request an extension until June 30, 2024, which was dismissed.
Originally, the court’s ruling mandated the bank to provide comprehensive information regarding the electoral bonds purchased between April 12, 2019, and February 15, 2024. This data included the purchase dates, purchaser names, bond denominations, as well as details of bonds redeemed by political parties, encompassing encashment dates and bond denominations. The court set a deadline of March 6 for the bank to fulfill these requirements.
However, the bank sought an extension until June 30, a date well beyond the Lok Sabha polls, to furnish the details to the Election Commission of India (ECI). Remarkably, the bank’s request for an extension came precisely two days prior to the court’s March 6 deadline. This delay potentially undermined the transparency and timeliness sought by the court in disclosing crucial electoral bond information.
The Bench highlighted that for each acquisition of electoral bonds, adherence to the “know your customer” (KYC) process was mandatory. Consequently, the bank would have already acquired information regarding the purchasers of electoral bonds. The top court criticized the SBI for its procrastination in adhering to its instructions. It cautioned the bank about the possibility of facing contempt of court proceedings for “willful disobedience” if it did not adhere to the directives within the specified deadline.
The State Bank of India (SBI) explained that extracting data on electoral bonds from various sources and cross-referencing it would be a lengthy process due to segregated data systems.
In the hearing regarding SBI’s extension request, the five-judge constitution bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud criticized the bank’s counsel, senior advocate Harish Salve, for not addressing the actions taken to meet the court’s directives. The bench emphasized the silence in the plea regarding compliance steps, highlighting the need for transparency and diligence in fulfilling court orders.
The court refrained from launching contempt proceedings against the SBI presently but placed the bank on notice, indicating potential action if it failed to adhere to the March 11 directives. Contempt petitions filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms, Common Cause, and Communist Party of India (Marxist) alleged that the bank deliberately aimed to withhold donor details and contribution amounts to political parties anonymously before the upcoming Lok Sabha elections scheduled for April-May.
Opposition figures in India lauded the Supreme Court’s decision, contending that the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government’s enactment of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) on March 11 was aimed at shifting focus away from the electoral bond scheme. Mallikarjun Kharge further remarked that this verdict would unveil the contributors to the BJP’s bond scheme, consequently revealing the scandals, transactions, and corruption within the Modi Government.
