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
National Boss's Day: How Great Communication Makes a Beloved Boss
Second Air India flight gets bomb threat in a day, Delhi to Chicago jet diverted to Canada
Jonas Eidevall resigns as Arsenal women's manager
Strictly Come Dancing professional fumes Chris McCausland 'should' be in bottom two
Amazon's most-reviewed 'cosy' heated blanket that 'saves on heating bills' is reduced by £23
Emailvalidation.io launches advanced email validation API to optimise email list accuracy
"Will not let Maharashtra elections become like Haryana": Shiv Sena UBT MP Sanjay Raut
Prince William has fans all the saying same thing with 'cool' new look at NFL event
Dharmendra Pradhan announces 3 'Centres of Excellence' in AI for healthcare, agriculture, and sustainable cities
India look to continue red-hot Test form against New Zealand
K'taka BJP to approach President urging sacking of 'anti-Hindu' Cong govt
Shraddha wins two gold & two silver at Asian Kickboxing Championship
Diwali 2024: Special Festival Trains Between Bengaluru And Kalaburagi - Check Stations And Timings
Tech Tips: Keep these things in mind before using a power bank..
'My Eyes, My Eyes': Video Of Man Cleaning His Colourful Kitchen Has Internet Talking
Medicines To Get Costlier? Why Regulator Approved 50% Hike For Asthma, Glaucoma, Thalassemia, TB Drugs
Did Amit Shah Authorise Attacks In Canada? Here's What Canadian Officials Claim
Sir Alex Ferguson's assistant has already made feelings clear on Sir Jim Ratcliffe's brutal cuts
'No substantial progress': SC asks NTF to hold periodic meetings, seeks tentative recommendations
WhatsApp Tips: Now you can also like WhatsApp status, and know the method...