On Tuesday (26th March): Supreme Court Justice BR Gavai highlighted the integral relationship between the right to free speech and the right to information, especially in the context of elections and the Electoral Bonds case. Emphasizing the evolution from colonialism to democracy, he reaffirmed the Court’s commitment to upholding constitutional values and encouraging citizen participation.
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.
Today (22nd March) The Supreme Court set guidelines for Lokayukta appointments, emphasizing the need for meaningful consultation with opposition leaders. This follows a plea contesting the Madhya Pradesh Lokayukta’s appointment without Leader of the Opposition consultation. The court aims to ensure transparency and statutory compliance in such appointments nationwide. The plea challenges the appointment’s transparency and demands its annulment.
Today (20th March): The Allahabad High Court demanded explanations for withholding annuities for nine temples in Vrindavan, emphasizing the automatic transfer of funds to temple accounts at the start of each financial year. Concerned about bureaucratic delays, the court rebuked the need for legal intervention and summoned officials to ensure timely disbursement.
On 18th March: The Punjab and Haryana High Court issued notices to the Central and Haryana governments following a petition challenging the appointment of Nayab Singh Saini as Chief Minister. The petition questions Saini’s eligibility and the legitimacy of other ministers. The court has scheduled a hearing for April 30 to address these concerns.
Today (18th March): During the hearing, advocate Mathews Nedumpara claimed that the citizens were unaware of the entire judgment in the Electoral Bond case. NEW DELHI: Today (March 18th): During the hearing concerning the Electoral Bond case, a heated verbal exchange between Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and advocate Mathews Nedumpara, creating waves on social media. […]
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.
Today, on 16th March: The Orissa High Court has postponed the hearing on the missing keys of Puri Jagannath Temple’s ‘Ratna Bhandar’ for two weeks in response to a PIL. The PIL seeks to present the Justice Raghubir Das Commission of Enquiry report in the state Assembly. The State Government requested two weeks to file an affidavit.
On Friday (14th March):Union Home Minister Amit Shah advocated for reforming the electoral bond system to enhance transparency and accountability in political funding. He respects the Supreme Court’s decision but suggests that modifications could address concerns. Shah defended the BJP’s benefit from the scheme and emphasized the need for improvements rather than its elimination.
On Thursday (14th March):Future Gaming and Hotel Services led by Santiago Martin emerged as the top purchaser of electoral bonds, acquiring bonds worth Rs 1,368 crore, followed by Megha Engineering Infrastructure Limited at Rs 966 crore and Qwik Supply Chain Private Limited at Rs 409 crore. The data also reveals extensive involvement of prominent political parties in the electoral bond scheme, reflecting bipartisan participation. The Election Commission, complying with Supreme Court’s directions, released comprehensive information for public scrutiny, enabling citizens to evaluate political affiliations and activities. The State Bank of India provided detailed information on electoral bond purchases and redemptions in adherence to the court’s directive. Additionally, a five-judge Constitution bench unanimously invalidated the electoral bonds scheme and related amendments, disallowing anonymous donations.