NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought responses from the Centre and the Election Commission (EC) on a petition challenging the practice of political parties promising freebies during election campaigns.
A bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, along with Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, issued notices to the government and the poll panel regarding a petition filed by Bengaluru resident Shashank J Sreedhara.
The petition, submitted by advocate Srinivasan, calls for the EC to take steps to prevent political parties from offering freebies during the pre-election period. It argues that the unregulated promise of freebies imposes a financial burden on the public exchequer and lacks any mechanism to ensure that pre-election promises are fulfilled after votes are secured. This petition has been linked with other similar pleas.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear petitions opposing the promise of election freebies after senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, representing lawyer and public interest litigant Ashwini Upadhyay, called for an urgent hearing.
Upadhyay's plea calls for a total ban on populist measures used to gain political favor, arguing that such promises violate the Constitution. It also requests the EC to implement deterrent measures to curb this practice. According to the plea, offering irrational freebies before elections unfairly influences voters, disrupts a level playing field, and compromises the integrity of the electoral process.
The petition further contends that the trend of political parties offering freebies with electoral gains in mind poses a threat to democratic values and undermines the spirit of the Constitution. It equates this practice with bribery, arguing that it is used to retain power at the expense of the public exchequer, which could harm democratic principles.
The petition also seeks a directive for the EC to amend the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968, adding a condition that prohibits political parties from promising or distributing irrational freebies from public funds during the election period. Additionally, it asks the court to declare that the promise or distribution of private goods or services not intended for public purposes violates several articles of the Constitution, including Article 14.
A bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, along with Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, issued notices to the government and the poll panel regarding a petition filed by Bengaluru resident Shashank J Sreedhara.
The petition, submitted by advocate Srinivasan, calls for the EC to take steps to prevent political parties from offering freebies during the pre-election period. It argues that the unregulated promise of freebies imposes a financial burden on the public exchequer and lacks any mechanism to ensure that pre-election promises are fulfilled after votes are secured. This petition has been linked with other similar pleas.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear petitions opposing the promise of election freebies after senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, representing lawyer and public interest litigant Ashwini Upadhyay, called for an urgent hearing.
Upadhyay's plea calls for a total ban on populist measures used to gain political favor, arguing that such promises violate the Constitution. It also requests the EC to implement deterrent measures to curb this practice. According to the plea, offering irrational freebies before elections unfairly influences voters, disrupts a level playing field, and compromises the integrity of the electoral process.
The petition further contends that the trend of political parties offering freebies with electoral gains in mind poses a threat to democratic values and undermines the spirit of the Constitution. It equates this practice with bribery, arguing that it is used to retain power at the expense of the public exchequer, which could harm democratic principles.
The petition also seeks a directive for the EC to amend the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968, adding a condition that prohibits political parties from promising or distributing irrational freebies from public funds during the election period. Additionally, it asks the court to declare that the promise or distribution of private goods or services not intended for public purposes violates several articles of the Constitution, including Article 14.
You may also like
Georgia kicks off early voting with record-breaking 2,50,000 ballot casts
Chairperson of JPC on waqf bill violating norms, say oppn MPs
ADM found dead a day after being accused of graft
World Food Day 2024: The First Millet Cafe In Chhattisgarh Praised By PM Modi Which Focuses On Sustainable Eating
Will Trump Work As McDonald's Fry Cook In Pittsburgh This Sunday? What We Know
King Charles given adorable nickname by children of Queen Camilla's son who think he's 'wonderful'
Canada using a routine NIA post to link India to goon's killing in Winnipeg
Fuzzy Logic: Can The Problem Of Urban Apathy Towards Voting Be Solved?
Embrace Confidence: Feel Comfortable In Your Own Skin
Editorial: Diplomacy Is A Must To End Disputes
Sharad Purnima 2024: Donate THESE Things On This Day To Get Auspicious Results
Hundreds of "mysterious black balls" wash ashore on popular Sydney beach
Guiding Light: Sharad Navaratri
Editorial: Democracy, The Key To Prosperity
Delhi-Chicago flight diverted to Canada as bomb hoaxes disrupt operations for 2nd day
Cristiano Ronaldo left furious as Andy Robertson breaths partial sigh of relief
Did an impending deposition spur Trudeau sabre-rattling?
'Opportunity Agenda For Black Men': All About Kamala Harris' New Economic Plan
Terrorists based in US & Canada behind killing of Shaurya Chakra winner in Punjab, NIA tells SC
10 killed, 15 injured in Israeli airstrike on Lebanon: Ministry