Along with the Centre, the Election Commission will also respond on the issue of ‘Free Revadi’ in elections, Supreme Court issues notice.

New Delhi : During the hearing of the petition filed against the practice of freebies during the election campaign, the Supreme Court has asked the Central Government and the Election Commission to file a reply in this matter. This new petition has been tagged with the already pending petition in this matter. The petition was filed by Bengaluru based person Shashank J Sridhara before the bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud of the Supreme Court and the free gift was banned. A demand was made to direct the Central Government to take effective steps in this matter and stop the practice of free gifts. During the hearing in the case, the Supreme Court has issued a notice to the Center and the Election Commission asking them to file their reply.

burden on government treasury

The petitioner said in his/her petition that distribution of freebies, i.e. free raadi, puts a huge financial burden on the government treasury and all this has gone out of control. Also, there is no mechanism to ensure that the promises made before the elections are fulfilled. Earlier in this case, a demand was made for early hearing on the petition filed by Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay and others. The Supreme Court had agreed to hear the case.

Freebies Supreme Court: Free gifts case referred to a bench of three judges, the court said – it needs to be re-looked
On behalf of advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, who had filed the PIL in the case, senior advocate Vijay Hansaria had argued that there is a need for hearing in the case. The petition states that populist announcements made to woo voters should be banned because all this is against the Constitution. Also, the Election Commission should take appropriate steps in this matter.

Request to re-look at the 2013 judgment

Petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay had said that there is a need to reconsider the decision given by the Supreme Court in 2013 in the case of Subramaniam Balaji vs State of Tamil Nadu. Then the Supreme Court had said in its decision that the promise made by a political party in the election manifesto is not a corrupt practice and the promises made in the election manifesto under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act are not in the category of corrupt practice. Also, the Supreme Court had said that CAG cannot decide how the government should spend the money and where to spend it.

Justice Chandrachud’s bench will now hear the free gift case, know what is the whole matter

Free and fair elections are affected

The petitioner has appealed to the Supreme Court to cancel the recognition of political parties that distribute free gifts or promise free gifts to woo voters before the elections. Petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay has said that the issue of political parties promising or giving gifts to voters before elections from government funds affects free and fair elections.