Supreme Court on Electoral Bonds: Hearing on the Electoral Bond case was held in the Supreme Court on Monday (18 March). The Constitution bench of the court, while hearing the hearing regarding the disclosure of the unique number of the electoral bond, reprimanded the State Bank of India (SBI). Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said that SBI will have to give every necessary information. On this the bank said that it is being defamed.
In fact, when the last time a hearing was held in the Supreme Court regarding electoral bonds, the court had questioned SBI for not disclosing the unique number of the bond. The court had said that SBI should disclose the unique number, as it is bound to do so. Through the unique number of the bond, it can be known which political party the donation was given and who was the person/company who gave it.
Table of Contents
SBI cannot give selective information: Chief Justice DY Chandrachud
The constitutional bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjeev Khanna, BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra heard the issue of unique number of electoral bonds. During the hearing, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud told lawyer Harish Salve, appearing on behalf of SBI, that we had asked to give complete details, but SBI has given selective information. She can’t do this. On this Salve said that we are ready to give all the information.
Wrong image is being created about SBI: Harish Salve
Chief Justice Chandrachud said, “You cannot wait for our order for everything that we will do whatever the court says. You should have understood the order.” On this, Harish Salve said, “A wrong image is being created about SBI. We want to clarify what was written in the order. We understood that the date of the bond, the name of the person purchasing the bond, the amount and the person who got it cashed. “Have been asked to provide details.”
During the hearing, Salve said, “Since the political parties had to tell the Election Commission who donated how much to them and this information was also given to the court in a sealed cover, hence this information had to come out.” He said that if the bond number has to be given, we will definitely give it. We don’t have any problem in this.
Also tell SBI bonds and give every information: CJI Chandrachud
CJI asked Harish Salve, “Tell us in what form you had the data.” Salve replied, “Earlier there was a condition of confidentiality, hence it was kept separately.” On this the Chief Justice said, “Earlier you had given the data at two different places. Now it seems that the data was at three places. The bond number was at a different place.” Salve replied, “No, it was at only two places.”
The Chief Justice asked, “Then what was the use of alpha numeric unique number? Didn’t the cashier make the payment by matching the branch number?” Salve said, “No, it was also cashed on the basis of KYC.” On this, Chief Justice Chandrachud said, “Okay. We now order that SBI should also disclose the bond number and should not keep any other information with itself. Everything should be disclosed.”
Salve said, “Absolutely, but we are being wrongly maligned in the media and elsewhere. We are not interested in hiding any information. We will make everything available.”
This bench headed by CJI Chandrachud also includes Justice Sanjeev Khanna, Justice BR Gavai, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Mishra.
Read 10 special things about this order…
1-SBI Chairman will have to share all the information related to the bonds by 5 pm on Thursday, March 21. It also includes information about the unique number of the bonds.
2- After giving the data to the SBI Chairman, he will have to give an affidavit in the Supreme Court.
3- The Election Commission will make this data public on its website as soon as it is received.
4- The Supreme Court refused to hear the letter of SCBA President Adish Aggarwal and said that it is just a publicity stunt.
5-Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi appeared on behalf of FICCI, Assocham (Industrialists) in this case. The court refused to hear them and said that we do not have your application.
6- Rohatgi said that the numbers should not be released. The court said that you have come after the order was issued, nothing can happen now.
7- The government said that some people and NGOs are trying to give a different turn to this matter through social media.
8- The court said that as an institution, it should not matter what is going on on social media.
9- Prashant Bhushan, on behalf of the petitioner, said that some political parties themselves have made public the information about the bonds received by them, the rest should also do so.
10- The court clearly said that we have taken 12 April 2019 as the cut off date. Therefore, this order will not be applicable on the bonds given before that.
