SC dismisses plea for probe into quid pro quos behind electoral bonds

NEW DELHI, Aug 2: The Supreme Court has refused to order a probe into quid pro quos behind electoral bonds.

Dismissing a batch of petitions seeking a court-monitored SIT probe headed by a retired judge into the allegations of quid pro quos behind the electoral bonds and donations made to political parties on Friday, the apex court said it is "inappropriate" to order such an investigation as the petitioners had not sought or denied remedies under the ordinary laws.

The court had earlier in February last scrapped the electoral bonds scheme that made funding by corporates to political parties anonymous. Consequently, fresh petitions were filed in the court to order an SIT probe into possible quid pro quo behind the purchase of the bonds.

The petitioners had argued that criminality may be involved in the purchase of the bonds if it is related to award of contract, or commission or omission by the authorities.

They said there would be prima facie a quid pro quo deal if a date of purchase of bonds was close to the award of a contract or a change in Government policy.

A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra observed that intervention under Article 32 must be preceded by the invocation of the normal remedies available under the law and their failure. And in the absence of which, an intervention would postulate that the normal remedies which are available under the law are not efficacious.

However, the court said, if there is a refusal to investigate or a closure report has been filed, recourse can be taken for appropriate remedies.

On the plea for directions to make recovery from political parties on the basis they are proceeds of crime, the court said it is the statutory functions of constitutional authorities. So the court will not make any directions to the authorities on the count. On the same ground, reopening of assessment by Income Tax authorities vis-a-vis the bonds cannot also be ordered.

For these reasons, constitution of an SIT headed by a former judge cannot be ordered, the apex court ruled.

There were four petitions filed in the case, including one filed jointly by NGOs Common Cause and the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL).

In February last, the Supreme Court had struck down the electoral bond scheme introduced in 2018 facilitating anonymous funding to political parties by corporates in the name of transparency. The court said undisclosed funding from corporates to political parties violated voters' rights.