A) Abstract / Headnote

The case centers around the application filed by the Election Commission of India (ECI) requesting the return of data related to Electoral Bonds that were filed in compliance with a previous interim order of the Supreme Court. The court addressed procedural issues concerning the scanning and digitization of these documents, enabling ECI to upload them to its website as per earlier directives. Additionally, the case highlighted the non-disclosure of alpha-numeric details of Electoral Bonds by the State Bank of India (SBI), prompting judicial directions for further compliance. The Supreme Court underscored the necessity of transparent electoral processes and issued guidelines for compliance by the ECI and SBI, emphasizing accountability.

Keywords: Electoral Bonds, Digitization, Transparency, Election Commission, Supreme Court.

B) Case Details

i) Judgment Cause Title:
Association for Democratic Reforms and Another v. Union of India and Others

ii) Case Number:
Miscellaneous Application Diary No. 11805 of 2024, in Miscellaneous Application No. 486 of 2024, in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 880 of 2017.

iii) Judgment Date:
15 March 2024.

iv) Court:
Supreme Court of India.

v) Quorum:
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud (CJI), Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, J.B. Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, JJ.

vi) Author:
Not specifically indicated.

vii) Citation:
[2024] 3 S.C.R. 417.

viii) Legal Provisions Involved:
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India (Freedom of Speech and Expression), alongside directives concerning transparency in electoral financing mechanisms.

ix) Judgments Overruled by the Case:
None mentioned.

x) Case Related to Which Law Subjects:
Constitutional Law, Election Law.

C) Introduction and Background of Judgment

This case follows a long-standing debate about the transparency of political funding through Electoral Bonds. Electoral Bonds, introduced in 2018, have faced criticism due to their anonymous nature, potentially enabling opaque funding of political parties. The Association for Democratic Reforms has consistently sought judicial intervention to bring transparency to electoral financing. In this context, the current application was filed by the ECI to retrieve data submitted to the court under sealed custody, necessary for complying with a prior judicial directive mandating its publication.

D) Facts of the Case

1. The ECI had submitted collated data on Electoral Bonds to the Supreme Court under sealed custody, as required by the interim order dated 12 April 2019.
2. Subsequently, on 11 March 2024, the Court directed ECI to upload this data on its website by 17 March 2024.
3. ECI disclosed that it did not retain a copy of the submitted data and sought its return for compliance.
4. The court noted that the State Bank of India (SBI), responsible for managing Electoral Bond transactions, failed to disclose critical alpha-numeric details of the bonds.
5. The court issued notice to SBI and directed the presence of a senior SBI officer for further proceedings.

E) Legal Issues Raised

1. Whether the ECI can retrieve and utilize sealed custody data submitted to the court for compliance purposes.
2. Whether SBI is obligated to provide detailed alpha-numeric information regarding Electoral Bonds to ensure transparency.

F) Petitioner/Appellant’s Arguments

1. Transparency Obligation: The counsel for the petitioners argued that Electoral Bonds lack sufficient transparency and hinder the electorate’s ability to make informed choices.
2. SBI’s Role: SBI’s reluctance to disclose alpha-numeric details compromises the goal of accountable political financing.
3. Compliance Delays: Petitioners underscored the need for timely compliance with the court’s directives to enhance public trust.

G) Respondent’s Arguments

1. Custodial Data Limitation: The ECI clarified that it had not retained a copy of the sealed data and required its retrieval to fulfill judicial directions.
2. SBI’s Response: The Solicitor General contended that SBI was not deliberately withholding information but sought notice to adequately represent its position.

H) Judgment

a. Ratio Decidendi
The court underscored the paramount importance of transparency in electoral processes. It mandated compliance with prior orders for digitizing and uploading Electoral Bond data, facilitating public access.

b. Obiter Dicta
The bench emphasized that institutions like the ECI and SBI hold fiduciary responsibilities to uphold democratic principles, necessitating their proactive transparency measures.

c. Guidelines Issued

1. The Registrar (Judicial) was directed to scan and digitize ECI-submitted data by 16 March 2024.
2. The digitized data, alongside its original, was to be returned to ECI for timely upload by 17 March 2024.
3. A senior SBI officer was ordered to attend the next hearing on 18 March 2024 to address the absence of alpha-numeric bond details.

I) Conclusion & Comments

This judgment reinforces the judiciary’s stance on electoral transparency. It highlights systemic challenges, like non-cooperation by institutions, in ensuring accountability. The court’s procedural directions are a significant step toward a more transparent electoral system.

J) References

a. Important Cases Referred

1. Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, [2021] 2 SCR 851.

b. Important Statutes Referred

1. Article 19(1)(a), Constitution of India.