The Calcutta High Court declined an urgent hearing on the Trinamool Congress’s plea challenging the freezing of its bank accounts after authorities imposed a debit freeze on three accounts. The action followed complaints by rebel MLAs seeking an investigation into the source of funds deposited in the party’s accounts.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking to include political parties under the Right to Information (RTI) Act will be heard tomorrow. The petitioner argues that transparency in political funding is essential for democracy. The case aims to compel parties to disclose financial details and enhance accountability, potentially transforming Indian political practices.
Today(on 2nd August),The Supreme Court has refused to form a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe alleged ‘quid pro quo’ deals in the Electoral Bond Scheme. Chief Justice DY Chandrachud’s bench is assessing the matter. The court had previously declared the scheme unconstitutional for not disclosing political party funding, prompting the State Bank of India to stop issuing the bonds.
The Supreme Court will hear a PIL seeking a court-monitored investigation into the electoral bonds scheme on July 22. Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra scheduled the hearing after reviewing submissions from lawyer Prashant Bhushan representing Common Cause and CPIL.
Today (6th May): Delhi’s Lieutenant Governor has recommended the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to probe into allegations of political funding received by Arvind Kejriwal’s party from the “Sikhs For Justice” group. Kejriwal, currently in Tihar Jail, faces legal challenges, and the situation remains uncertain, with potential implications for Delhi’s governance and administration.
![[Electoral Bond Data] SBI Refuses to Disclose Data Under RTI Act](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/MicrosoftTeams-image-23.png?resize=447%2C269&ssl=1)
On Wednesday (10th April): The State Bank of India (SBI) refused to disclose electoral bond data under the RTI Act, citing exemptions related to fiduciary capacity and public interest. This refusal, including the denial of information about the payment to lawyer Harish Salve, has raised concerns about transparency and accountability, undermining democratic principles and public interest. The case may reflect future changes in RTI Act exemptions under the upcoming Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
The Supreme Court’s recent invalidation of the electoral bonds scheme highlights the balance between privacy and transparency in political funding. The decision emphasizes the crucial role of judicial review in safeguarding fundamental rights and underscores the significance of public access to information about political contributions. This ruling signifies the evolving nature of law and democracy.
On sunday (17th March): The Election Commission of India disclosed details about electoral bonds, revealing significant financial flows to political parties. The data lacks donor identities, maintaining anonymity in political funding. The Supreme Court’s recent ruling challenges the secrecy of the scheme and advocates for more transparency in political party funding, sparking discussions about regulation.