SC Rejects Plea Seeking SIT Probe into Electoral Bond ‘Scam’

NEW DELHI:
The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a Special Investigative Team (SIT) probe under the supervision of a retired apex court judge into an alleged scam in poll financing using electoral bonds.

During the hearing, the bench presided over by CJI D.Y. Chandrachud observed that the ordinary course of law may remedy the allegations raised in the petition, and asked advocate Prashant Bhushan to explain as to why the top court should interfere in the matter.

Prashant Bhushan replied, “Nothing will come out in an ordinary FIR unless investigated under the supervision of a retired SC judge. There is an apparent quid pro quo. This is one of the worst kinds of financial corruption this country has witnessed.”

Bhushan said the majority of electoral bonds appeared to have been given quid pro quo, adding that not only “political parties and very very influential corporates”, but some of the “premier investigating agencies also appear to be involved”.

He submitted that the SC judgment striking down the electoral bonds scheme itself had apprehended such quid pro quo.

At this, the CJI Chandrachud-led bench said, “We decided the case. We ordered disclosure of electoral bond details. Now, these reliefs could have been sought in those proceedings. But, we have gone up to a certain point and ordered disclosure. We have quashed the scheme.”

“Your lordships could not have granted the relief which we seek now,” responded Bhusan, referring to the prayers contained in the PIL.

The apex court said that an SIT cannot be formed to probe “quid pro quo” unless there is an FIR already registered on the issue espoused in the PIL.

Bhushan said that in the past, the Supreme Court had ordered probe into the coalgate and hawala scams in extraordinary circumstances.

He said, “The companies which gave electoral bonds received large contracts from the government run by that political party. Governments are involved, ruling parties are involved, investigative agencies appear to be involved, and top corporate houses are involved. This is the most extraordinary case of corruption which has come to light before the Supreme Court. Nothing will come out in a normal FIR.”

“In coalgate, not only a CBI investigation was ordered, this court also held that coal contracts were awarded arbitrarily. It was only because of the monitoring of the investigation by this court that the coalgate matter reached some conclusion,” Bhusha added.

He also suggested appointing a former SC judge along with some retired CBI officials to take up a preliminary inquiry into the matter, and then the apex court may decide the further course of action.

Delivering its verdict in the open court, the bench, also comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, said that it would be “premature and inappropriate” to entertain the petition filed directly before the apex court unless the remedies available under ordinary law have not been availed.

Further, it said that issuing directions to reopen income tax assessments of political parties that received electoral bonds would impinge upon statutory functions of the tax authorities and amount to conclusion on facts.

The PIL filed by the NGO Common Cause and Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) said that electoral bond data — revealed on top court’s directions — shows that the bulk of the bonds appeared to have been given as quid pro quo arrangements by corporates to political parties for getting contracts, licences, and leases from the governments or authorities.

Further, it alleged that electoral bonds were given by corporates to political parties as consideration for favourable policy changes and in close proximity to action by agencies like the Enforcement Directorate (ED), the Income Tax Department, or the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

Several firms that were under investigation by these agencies donated large sums of money to the ruling party, potentially to influence the outcomes of the probes, the petition claimed.

“Though these apparent payoffs amount to several thousand crores, they appear to have influenced contracts worth lakhs of crores and regulatory inaction by agencies worth thousands of crores and also appear to have allowed substandard or dangerous drugs to be sold in the market, endangering the lives of millions of people in the country,” the plea stated.

It added that the data disclosed on electoral bonds indicated that at least 20 companies bought electoral bonds worth more than Rs 100 crore within three years of their incorporation and in some cases, the companies were just a few months old when they purchased the bonds, in flagrant violation of the provisions of the Companies Act.

The plea also said the data has further shown that various loss-making companies and shell companies were donating huge sums to political parties through electoral bonds and the introduction of electoral bonds led to the mushrooming of shell companies, which were used by corporate houses as conduits to launder illicit money.

It also stated that the electoral bond ‘scam’ has a money trail unlike the 2G scam or the coal scam, where court-monitored investigations were ordered despite no evidence of a money trail.

“Thus, the investigation in this case would not only need to unravel the entire conspiracy in each instance, which would involve officers of the company, officials of the government, and functionaries of political parties, but also the officers concerned of agencies like the ED/IT and CBI etc., who appear to have become part of this conspiracy,” read the petition, calling for a probe by an SIT of investigating officers of impeccable integrity chosen by the top court and working under the supervision of a retired SC judge.