Supreme Court issues notice on plea seeking curb on pre-election freebies

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notices to the Centre, the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking restrictions on the announcement of what it describes as “irrational freebies” by political parties ahead of elections.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the matter would be heard alongside a batch of pending petitions raising similar concerns. The case adds to an ongoing judicial examination of the broader issue of electoral inducements.

The petition, filed by advocate Narendra Goswami, seeks a declaration that the promise or distribution of freebies funded by public money constitutes “bribery” and a “corrupt practice” under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. It argues that such measures, often announced in the run-up to polls, undermine the integrity of free and fair elections.

Describing the issue in stark terms, the plea contends that unchecked electoral giveaways risk eroding democratic values by fostering what it calls a transactional relationship between voters and political parties. According to the petitioner, such practices amount to a “systemic” form of inducement that distorts electoral choice.

The petition further raises concerns over the fiscal sustainability of such schemes, claiming that governments increasingly rely on borrowing to finance them, thereby shifting the burden onto future generations. It calls for greater transparency by directing the ECI to require political parties to publish a “Fiscal Impact Statement” detailing the financial implications of their promises.

In addition, the petitioner has sought powers for the ECI to take punitive action, including possible de-recognition of parties that fail to comply with such disclosure norms. The plea also urges the CAG to conduct performance audits of freebie schemes to determine whether they meet the “public purpose” requirement under the Constitution.

A key aspect of the petition is its request for the court to revisit its earlier ruling in S. Subramaniam Balaji vs. State of Tamil Nadu. In that judgment, the apex court had held that the distribution of free colour television sets by a state government could not be classified as a corrupt electoral practice under existing law, treating such promises as matters of policy.

The present plea challenges that interpretation, arguing that it failed to adequately consider the alleged quid pro quo nature of such schemes. It seeks a reconsideration of the legal position in light of evolving electoral practices.

The issue of poll-time freebies is already under consideration by the Supreme Court in a separate petition filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, indicating that the court may soon take a more comprehensive view on the matter.

With notices now issued, the case is expected to contribute to a wider debate on the balance between welfare policy and electoral fairness, as well as the financial implications of pre-election promises.

With IANS inputs