Supreme Court refers freebies case to three-member bench

The apex court was hearing a petition filed by former BJP Delhi spokesperson Ashwini Upadhyay, which sought that political parties be refrained from promising freebies ahead of elections.
File image of the Supreme Court of India
File image of the Supreme Court of India
Written by:
Published on

The Supreme Court, which was hearing the ‘freebies’ case on Friday, August 26, has referred the matter for reconsideration by a three-member bench. Chief Justice NV Ramana, who headed the bench that was hearing the case, observed that the issues raised by the petitioners required “extensive hearing”, and referred the matter to a three-judge bench. The apex court was hearing a petition filed by former BJP Delhi spokesperson Ashwini Upadhyay, which sought direction that the Election Commission not allow political parties to promise freebies, which are paid for by taxpayers, ahead of elections.

“The worries raised by the petitioner that under the guise of welfare, fiscal responsibility is dispensed with, must also be considered,” the Supreme Court bench said, with Chief Justice NV Ramana saying that it was a serious issue. In the last hearing, the petitioners had argued that the Supreme Court’s Subramaniam Balaji vs State of Tamil Nadu judgment of 2013 —  which said that promises made by political parties before elections can’t be called as bribes — must be overruled. “Looking at the complexity of the issue and the prayer to overrule the Subramaniam Balaji judgment, we refer the matter to a three-judge bench,” CJI Ramana said, adding that an expert body may be formed to look into the same.

Political parties including the DMK, YSRCP, Congress and AAP have intervened in the case, contending that freebies are not the same as welfare schemes meant for the upliftment of the poor. DMK leaders have been maintaining that freebies are essentially welfare measures and the state government has the right to decide what welfare measures have to be given. Earlier on August 24, the court came down on DMK counsel and senior advocate P Wilson for his statements, saying the judiciary is responsible and that wisdom does not rest with any one party. Meanwhile, senior advocate AM Singhvi, appearing for the Aam Aadmi Party, said that the PIL petitioner was seeking a gag order without saying so.

The hearing was live-streamed online for the first time on the National Informatics Centre website. August 26 is NV Ramana’s last day as the Chief Justice of India as he is set to retire, and Justice UU Lalit is set to take oath as the new Chief Justice on Saturday, August 27.

Subscriber Picks

No stories found.
The News Minute
www.thenewsminute.com