A) ABSTRACT / HEADNOTE

This case revolves around the contentious issue of Electoral Bonds and their implications on transparency in political funding. The Supreme Court of India clarified the extent of disclosure required under sub-paragraphs “b” and “c” of paragraph 219 of a prior judgment involving the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) and the Union of India. The State Bank of India (SBI) was mandated to disclose details regarding Electoral Bonds purchased and redeemed by political parties to the Election Commission of India (ECI). The Court emphasized that these details, inclusive of alphanumeric identifiers, are integral for transparency. A miscellaneous application seeking to pre-date the disclosure point was deemed not maintainable as it sought to modify the substantive judgment.

Keywords: Electoral Bonds, Political Transparency, State Bank of India, Election Commission, Disclosure Mandate.

B) CASE DETAILS

i. Judgement Cause Title:
Association of Democratic Reforms & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

ii. Case Number:
Miscellaneous Application No. 596 of 2024 in Diary No. 11805 of 2024

iii. Judgement Date:
18 March 2024

iv. Court:
Supreme Court of India

v. Quorum:
Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, JJ.

vi. Author:
Bench Decision

vii. Citation:
[2024] 3 S.C.R. 1315

viii. Legal Provisions Involved:

• Sub-paragraphs “b” and “c” of paragraph 219 of the prior judgment in Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. [2024] 2 S.C.R. 420
• Electoral Bonds Scheme under relevant RBI guidelines

ix. Judgments Overruled by the Case (if any):
None

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

C) INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF JUDGEMENT

The debate over Electoral Bonds stems from their introduction as a mechanism to allow anonymous political donations. Critics, including the petitioners (ADR and Anr.), argued that the scheme undermines transparency and accountability in political funding. In a prior judgment, the Supreme Court addressed these concerns, mandating SBI to disclose transactional details to the ECI. Subsequently, Miscellaneous Applications were filed, challenging the operationalization of these directions and seeking further modifications, particularly on disclosure points predating the Court’s interim orders.

D) FACTS OF THE CASE

1. Petitioner’s Grievance: Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) alleged that the lack of transparency in the Electoral Bond Scheme hindered voters’ rights to make informed decisions. They asserted that anonymous donations could lead to undue influence and corruption in governance.

2. Role of SBI and ECI: The SBI, as the sole issuing authority of Electoral Bonds, was directed to provide detailed data regarding purchases and redemptions of these bonds. The ECI, responsible for election oversight, was tasked with making this information publicly accessible.

3. Applications for Modification: Miscellaneous Applications sought to extend or modify prior directions, including one seeking disclosures prior to April 2019, which the Court summarily rejected.

E) LEGAL ISSUES RAISED

1. Extent of Disclosure by SBI: Should SBI reveal all transactional details, including alphanumeric identifiers and serial numbers, under sub-paragraphs “b” and “c” of the prior judgment?

2. Maintainability of the Miscellaneous Application: Could a Miscellaneous Application substantively modify the operative parts of the earlier judgment?

3. Transparency vs. Confidentiality: How should the balance between the voters’ right to know and the donors’ anonymity be maintained?

F) PETITIONER/APPELLANT’S ARGUMENTS

1. Lack of Transparency in Electoral Bonds: The petitioners contended that the anonymity afforded by the scheme violated citizens’ fundamental right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

2. Comprehensive Disclosures Essential: They argued that complete details, including alphanumeric and serial numbers of Electoral Bonds, are crucial for preventing financial malpractices.

3. Judgment Implementation Delay: The petitioners pointed out SBI’s reluctance to provide timely disclosures, alleging non-compliance with the Court’s prior judgment.

G) RESPONDENT’S ARGUMENTS

1. Compliance with Directions: SBI, represented by senior counsel, emphasized their readiness to disclose all data in compliance with the Court’s directives.

2. Preservation of Anonymity: The respondents highlighted the need to balance transparency with confidentiality to protect donors from undue scrutiny.

3. Legal Constraints on Pre-dating Disclosures: The Attorney General argued that retrospective modifications via Miscellaneous Applications could not alter substantive judgments.

H) JUDGEMENT

a. RATIO DECIDENDI
The Court ruled that SBI’s disclosure obligations under the previous judgment are exhaustive. It clarified that the term “include” in sub-paragraphs “b” and “c” is illustrative, requiring disclosure of all transactional specifics.

b. OBITER DICTA
The Court remarked that transparency in political funding is integral to democratic accountability and that vague or incomplete disclosures would dilute this principle.

c. GUIDELINES

1. SBI must disclose all transactional details, including alphanumeric identifiers, by March 21, 2024.
2. ECI must upload these details upon receipt to ensure public accessibility.
3. Modifications to substantive judgments via Miscellaneous Applications are not permissible.

I) CONCLUSION & COMMENTS

This judgment reinforces the judiciary’s role in upholding electoral transparency while delineating the scope of miscellaneous judicial relief. It underscores the critical need for detailed disclosures to protect electoral integrity. The ruling also emphasizes procedural discipline in seeking modifications to judgments.

J) REFERENCES

a. Important Cases Referred

1. Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., [2024] 2 S.C.R. 420
2. Interim Order dated 12 April 2019 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 880 of 2017

b. Important Statutes Referred

1. Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India
2. Relevant RBI Guidelines for Electoral Bonds Scheme