Petition Filed In Supreme Court Over SBI’s Failure To Disclose Information Of Electoral Bonds Citing Voters’ Right

Advocate Prashant Bhushan requested an expedited hearing for the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) against the State Bank of India (SBI) in relation to the latter’s purported failure to comply with the Supreme Court’s directive to reveal electoral bonds details.

The political battle

This action by ADR takes place in the midst of the ongoing fight for political funding transparency, especially with regard to the divisive electoral bonds program.

Bhushan brought up the urgent listing of the contempt petition that Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud was facing. According to Bhushan, the SBI has submitted an application, which is probably going to be listed on Monday, requesting an extension of time until June 30 to provide the information. He asked that the SBI’s application be listed with the contempt petition as well. Bhushan was instructed by CJI to email a request containing the application number.

SBI accused of willful disobedience

The State Bank of India (SBI) is accused of willful disobedience in the contempt petition filed with the supreme court, which also requests the start of contempt proceedings. ADR claims that SBI, the bank that issues electoral bonds, has neglected to provide the Election Commission of India (ECI) with essential information about the bonds within the time frame that the Court has set. The petition, which was submitted following the Supreme Court’s decision on February 15, emphasizes how critical it is to release information regarding.

Also Read: INDIA Bloc Offers 8 Lok Sabha Seats To Chirag Paswan In Exchange Of Joining Alliance: Sources

What has ADR contested?

A Supreme Court constitution bench last month ordered the State Bank of India to provide the Election Commission of India with information on all electoral bonds bought since April 12, 2019, by March 6. Nevertheless, the bank applied for an extension until June 30 days prior to the deadline, citing the difficulty in interpreting and gathering information from the bond sales.

The extension request from SBI is contested by ADR in a contempt petition, which calls it “mala fide” and an attempt to obstruct transparency efforts ahead of the next Lok Sabha elections. The group contends that the State Bank of India has the tools required to quickly gather and make available data on election bonds. ADR claims that the SBI’s IT system, which was created for managing electoral bonds, is operational and capable of producing reports with ease using the unique numbers assigned to

The petition challenges SBI’s stated challenges in gathering data, citing the bank’s records of the unique numbers assigned to each electoral bond and the buyers’ Know Your Customer (KYC) information. It also points out that SBI has a large branch network and an efficient IT system, which simplify the process of gathering information for about 22,217 electoral bonds.

Voters’ rights

ADR argues that voters have a fundamental right to know about the substantial amounts of money that are contributed to political parties through electoral bonds, highlighting the importance of transparency in political financing. According to the petition, the absence of transparency contradicts the fundamental principles of participatory democracy as stated in the Constitution’s Article 19(1)(a). As part of its ruling in the electoral bonds case, the Supreme Court issued directives that were intended to increase transparency.