Electoral Bonds Hearing Highlights: SC dismisses SBI's plea seeking extension, directs it to disclose details on March 12

Supreme Court to hear today the Electoral Bonds case

SBI position on poll bonds unconvincing

Many hold that the reasons cited by the bank for its inability to comply with the court’s directive are untenable.

Read more

SC's responsibility to protect its dignity: Sibal on SBI plea on electoral bonds issue

Terming the SBI's reasons for seeking an extension in disclosing electoral bond details "puerile", Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal Sunday said it is the Supreme Court's responsibility to protect its dignity and that it "would not be easy" to accept the bank's plea when a Constitution bench has rendered a judgement.

Sibal, who led the argument for the petitioners in the Supreme Court case against the electoral bond scheme, said the State Bank of India (SBI) claiming that it would take several weeks to make the data public sounds like "somebody wants to protect somebody".

The contempt plea, filed by NGOs Association for Democratic Reforms and Common Cause, claimed SBI's application seeking extension of time has been deliberately filed at the last moment to ensure that details of donor and the amount of donations are not disclosed to the public before the upcoming Lok Sabha elections.

Before the hearing begins, let us get you up-to-date with the case

• A five-judge Constitution bench of the SC will hear an application filed by the State Bank of India (SBI) seeking extension of time till June 30 to disclose details of each electoral bond encashed by political parties before the scheme was scrapped last month.

• The bench, headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, will also hear a separate plea which has sought initiation of contempt action against the SBI alleging it "wilfully and deliberately" disobeyed the apex court's direction to submit details of the contributions made to political parties through electoral bonds to the Election Commission by March 6.

According to the apex court's cause list for Monday, the bench, also comprising justices Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra will assemble at 10:30 am to hear the two petitions.

What led to the hearing?

• In a landmark verdict delivered on February 15, a five-judge constitution bench had scrapped the Centre's electoral bonds scheme of anonymous political funding, calling it "unconstitutional" and ordering disclosure by the Election Commission of the donors, the amount donated by them and the recipients by March 13.

• Ordering closure of the scheme forthwith, the top court had directed the SBI, the authorised financial institution under the scheme, to submit by March 6 the details of the electoral bonds purchased since April 12, 2019 till date to the Election Commission which was asked to publish the information on its official website by March 13.

• However, on March 4, the SBI had moved the apex court seeking extension of time till June 30 to disclose the details of the electoral bonds encashed by political parties.
  

What is in SBI's application seeking extension?

• In its application, the SBI contended that retrieval of information from "each silo" and the procedure of matching the information of one silo to that of the other would be a time-consuming exercise.

• The application said due to stringent measures undertaken to ensure that the identity of the donors was kept anonymous, "decoding' the electoral bonds and matching the donors to the donations made would be a complex process.

• "It submitted that the data related to the issuance of the bond and the data related to the redemption of the bond was kept recorded in two different silos. No central database was maintained. This was done to ensure that donors' anonymity would be protected," it said.

• "It is submitted that donor details were kept in a sealed cover at the designated branches and all such sealed covers were deposited in the main branch of the applicant bank, which is located in Mumbai," it said.

Why was the contempt plea filed by NGOs Association for Democratic Reforms and Common Cause?

• The contempt plea claimed SBI's application seeking extension of time has been deliberately filed at the last moment to ensure that details of donor and the amount of donations are not disclosed to the public before the upcoming Lok Sabha elections.

• "It is submitted that the said application is mala fide and demonstrates a wilful and deliberate disobedience & defiance of the judgement passed by the constitution bench of this court. It is further a clear attempt to undermine the authority of this court," it said.

• "The petitioner herein is filing the instant petition seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against State Bank of India for wilfully and deliberately disobeying the order dated February 15 passed by this court… wherein this court directed SBI to submit details of contribution made to the political parties through electoral bonds to the Election Commission of India by March 6," the contempt plea said.

• It said as per clause 7 of the electoral bond scheme, information furnished by the buyer can be disclosed when demanded by a competent court.

• "As per clause 12 (4) of the scheme, electoral bonds have to be encashed within fifteen days failing which the amount of bonds not encashed are to be deposited by the bank to the PM relief Fund. Thus, it is inconceivable that SBI does not have the recorded information readily available within its data base," it said.

• The plea said electoral bonds are "completely traceable" which is evident from the fact that SBI maintains a secret number-based record of donors who buy bonds and the political parties they donate to.

• The contempt plea said any form of anonymity in the finances of political parties goes against the essence of participatory democracy and people's right to know enshrined under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

• It said availability of information about electoral bonds will give voters a chance to truly inspect, express and decide their choices.

The bench is yet to assemble, hearing to begin shortly

Credit: X/@LiveLawIndia

Sr Adv Kapil Sibal, Adv Prashant Bhushan, Shadan Farasat (for petitioners) & Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta & Sr Adv Harish Salve (appearing virtually) present.

Bench to hear the electoral bonds case assembles

"I appear for State Bank. We need a little more time to comply with your lordships' order," says Salve who is appearing for SBI

Salve refers to the application filed by the SBI and the operative part of the judgment.

Salve assures that the SBI has stopped issuing electoral bonds

Senior advocate Harish Salve appearing for the State Bank of India (SBI) tells Supreme Court that the bank needs extra time to submit details of Electoral Bonds to the Election Commission of India.

CJI responds to Salve's plea:

"Mr.Salve, if you see your application, what you say is...it is submitted that donor details were kept in a sealed cover in a designated branch and all sealed covers were deposited at the main branch in Mumbai. On the other hand, political parties could redeem at 29 authorised bank.."

"What you are saying is that donor details were sent to Mumbai main branch and the political parties' details were also sent to the same branch and thus two sets of information were there."

(Source: LiveLaw)

"To seek time saying that a matching exercise is to be done is not warranted, we have not directed you to do that," says CJI as the advocate representing SBI asks for extra time

Salve says the only problem which the SBI has is, it is trying to reverse the whole process. The SOP made sure that there was no name of the purchaser in our core banking system and the bond number. We were told that this was supposed to be secret.

"We have details. I am not saying we don't have," says Salve as the CJI says that every time a purchase was made, KYC was mandated.

Justice Khanna adds: "You say all purchaser details are kept in a sealed cover. You just need to open the sealed cover and give the details."

(Source: LiveLaw)

Salve says that he has the details of those who purchased the bonds and political party that encashed it. "That is not a problem".

We expect some candour from the State Bank of India, says CJI as it slams SBI for not disclosing its progress so far

Can't make mistakes in hurry says Salve as SC slams SBI for delay in sharing progress

"There is no question of any mistake. You have the KYC. You are the number 1 bank in the country. We expect you to handle it," responds Justice Khanna.

(Source: Live Law)

In the last 26 days, what steps have you taken? Your application is silent on that: SC to SBI on electoral bonds

We have asked you to do plain disclosure as per our judgment: Supreme Court to SBI on electoral bonds

Judges discuss as Salve seeks time

In the order, there are two parts B and C. If you don't want to create a bridge between B and C, within 3 weeks we can give everything: Salve to SCI Bench

SBI says that it can give details within 3 weeks if there is no requirement to link purchaser details with the parties.

SC bench questions the three weeks ask. Points out that the political parties have already given the details of the encashment made by them.

Credit: SC Website

CJI starts dictating the order:

"By judgment dated Feb 15, this Court declared the Electoral Bonds scheme unconstitutional on the ground that non-disclosure of information regarding the funding of political parties is violative of right to information of citizens under Article 19(1)(a). The amendments permitting unlimited political funding by corporate entities were held to be arbitrary and violative of Article 14."

(Source: Live Law)

This Court had directed the SBI to submit the details of the electoral bonds purchased by the contributors and redeemed by political parties between April 12, 2019 till 15 Feb 2024: SC as it reads out its order

SC in its order says that the court has sought below mentioned details by March 6

SC mentions ADR, Communist Party of India (Marxist) who instituted a petition invoking the contempt jurisdiction of this Court

What has to be analyzed is whether SBI is justified in seeking extension of time: CJI

Credit: SC Website

"In terms of the provisions of the electoral bonds scheme itself SBI is mandated to disclose information when mandated by a Court," SC bench

To substantiate, SBI has averred that; (a) information is not available in a digital format; (b) Clause 7.1.2 of SOP stipulates that "no details of bond purchaser including KYC and other details will be entered in the core banking system".

(Source: Live Law)

The crux of the submission of SBI is that the matching of information to ascertain who contributed to which political party is a time consuming process since the information is maintained in two separate silos: SC

Credit: SC Website

The directions which have been issued by this court require SBI to disclose information that is already available with it: CJI

FAQs on Electoral Bonds published by the SBI states KYC documents must be submitted by the purchaser each time the bond is purchased irrespective of whether the purchaser has a KYC verified SBI account: SC

Credit: SC Website

The details of the electoral bonds which have been purchased are readily available: SC

The FAQs with respect to redemption of bonds states that each political party can only open one current account for EB redemption. The current account would be opened by the political party only in 39 authorised branches: SC

There is no dispute about the fact that this process was duly followed: SC

Together with the SBI's application for extension of time, ADR has filed a contempt petition in which it submits that the information can be easily disclosed by the SBI because of the unique number printed on the electoral bonds: SC

The submission of SBI in the application sufficiently indicate that the information that is to directed to court is readily available: SC

The application filed by the SBI seeking extension of time until 30 June, 2024 is dismissed.

ECI shall compile the information and publish the details in its official website no later than by 15 March, 2024 by 5 PM: SC

The SBI shall file an affidavit of its Chairman and Managing Director on compliance with the directions issued above. While we are not inclined to exercise the contempt jurisdiction at this time, we place SBI on notice that this Court may be inclined to proceed against it for wilful disobedience if SBI does not comply with the directions by the timelines indicated in this order: SC

SC protects democracy from 'devious machinations' of current regime: Cong on electoral bonds issue

The Congress Monday hailed the Supreme Court for dismissing the SBI's plea seeking an extension of time to furnish details of electoral bonds, saying the apex court has once again come to protect democracy from the "devious machinations" of the current regime.

A five-judge Constitution bench of the top court on Monday dismissed the State Bank of India's plea for time extension and directed it to furnish the details of electoral bonds to the Election Commission by close of business hours on March 12.

Karnataka Youth Congress workers organised a demonstration outside the SBI bank in Bengaluru after the SC verdict dismissing the bank's plea seeking extension

Supreme Court has taken a tough stand on the SBI's application for extension: Advocate Prashant Bhushan

"The Supreme Court has taken a tough stand on the SBI's application for extension of time till June 30 to disclose details about donors of electoral bonds as well as the parties which redeemed these electoral bonds. The court has dismissed the application of the SBI, pointing out that the data that the court had asked them to give is already available with the SBI as per their affidavit, they've to submit the details of the donors and details of the parties which redeemed these electoral bonds."

"Thank you Supreme Court," says Mahua Moitra after SC quashes SBI's extension plea

So the BJP who came to power proimising to reveal Swiss bank details are now fearing to reveal SBI details!: Mahua Moitra

Credit: PTI Photo