Supreme Court Stands Firm on SBI’s Electoral Bond Disclosure Deadline
Regarding the electoral bond dispute, the Supreme Court has declined to grant SBI any remedy. According to the Supreme Court, the Election Commission must make the material available to the public by March 15 and SBI must deliver it by tomorrow. The Supreme Court received a petition from SBI requesting an extension of time till June 30th for the provision of election bond information.
On behalf of SBI, senior attorney Harish Salve attended the Supreme Court hearing. Salve stated in court that SBI has prohibited the issuing of fresh Election Bonds following the Supreme Court’s ruling, but the difficulty is that the Bonds have already been issued. It would take some time to undo the entire procedure. The SBI’s case was rejected by the Supreme Court, which instead mandated that the information be provided by tomorrow.
There is no connection between the bond buyer and the bond’s information, as guaranteed by the SOP. We were informed that it was to remain confidential and that the bond buyer’s identity and the transaction date were encoded, requiring a considerable amount of time to decode.
SBI faces criticism in the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said the SBI during the hearing, “You (SBI) are saying that the information of donors and political parties is in the main branch of SBI in Mumbai with a sealed cover.” We did not request that you match; rather, we only asked for clear disclosure. The matching procedure will take time.
Justice Khanna, part of the Constitution Bench overseeing the case, instructed SBI’s lawyer Harish Salve, stating, ‘Since you mentioned that comprehensive details about the electoral bond are stored in a sealed cover envelope, you must disclose the information by simply unsealing the cover.’
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) expressed dissatisfaction with the State Bank of India (SBI), stating, ‘We issued the order on February 15, and today is March 11. What progress has been made in the last 26 days? It is essential to acknowledge completed tasks, and if more time is required, this should be communicated transparently. We anticipate openness from SBI.’
Responding to this, SBI’s lawyer, Harish Salve, proposed a three-week timeline for providing complete information if matching was not a prerequisite. However, the court declined SBI’s argument and mandated the bank to furnish the information by tomorrow, March 12. Additionally, the Election Commission was directed to make this information public by March 15.
The Supreme Court dismissed SBI’s plea and emphasized, ‘The SBI Chairman and MD must submit an affidavit to adhere to the order. While we are refraining from initiating contempt action against SBI on this occasion, we want to make it clear that future violations, willful disobedience of court orders, or failure to adhere to instructions within the specified timeframe may result in contempt proceedings against the bank.’
The Supreme Court addressed petitions from both SBI and ADR.
The Supreme Court deliberated on the plea from the State Bank of India (SBI), where the bank requested an extension of the deadline for disclosing information about electoral bonds until June 30. Additionally, the court heard a petition from the NGO ADR, which included a contempt petition against SBI.
The petition from ADR asserted that SBI intentionally disobeyed the Supreme Court’s order. The court had previously directed SBI to provide information about electoral bonds to the Election Commission by March 6, and the Election Commission was instructed to disclose this information to the public by March 13.
Read more: Tata Chemicals Shares Dip 10% as Excitement Over Tata Sons IPO Subsides
These petitions were heard by a five-judge panel led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud. Judge DY Chandrachud is joined on the court by Justices Sanjeev Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Mishra.
A panel of five judges is presiding over the case
Electoral Bonds were outlawed by the Supreme Court. The Center’s Electoral Bonds program was declared unlawful by a five-judge Constitution bench on February 15. The court had mandated that SBI Bank, the sole financial institution involved in the Electoral Bond Scheme, furnish comprehensive data regarding the acquisition of Electoral Bonds from April 12, 2019, to the present, by March 6.
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously to invalidate the plan, citing violations of the fundamental rights to information access and freedom of speech and expression.
Read more:Google Fires Employee for Anti-Israel Protest at Tech Event
Read more : Political Ripples in Bengal: Ram Navami Declared Public Holiday Amid BJP Criticism
