SC refers 'freebies' issue to a three-judge bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud

The Supreme Court on August 24 referred the issue of "freebies” announced by political parties in the run-up to elections to a three-judge bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud, which will also review a 2013 order of the court on the issue.

While hearing a batch of petitions, the Supreme Court said for identifying the issue at hand and to draw a distinction between welfare schemes and doles, its previous judgment required a relook.

The case has emerged as the latest flashpoint between the ruling BJP and other opposition parties. The Centre has warned that indiscriminate doles like free electricity adversely affect the country’s economy. The opposition parties say these are welfare decisions needed to help the weaker sections.

In 2013, a two-judge bench said promises of free gifts by political parties couldn't be called a bribe. Items and schemes given by the government for the betterment of the lives of the citizens were, in fact, in line with the Directive Principles of State Policy, the bench said.

It also ruled that the court couldn't lay down the guidelines on allowing or disallowing promises made by political parties ahead of the polls.

During the hearing on August 24, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the court cannot delve into the realm of deciding what constitutes a freebie.

Vikas Singh, the counsel for petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay submitted that a relook of the 2013 judgment may solve the problem of identifying the issues to be taken up.

In his public interest litigation, Upadhyay has sought directions for the government and the Election Commission to regulate political manifestos and hold parties accountable for pre-poll promises.

The three-judge bench will now revisit the 2013 judgment.

The freebies issue, which has triggered a political storm, was termed as a "complex" and "important issue for the welfare of the country" by CJI NV Ramana, who retires on August 26.

The CJI-led bench had deliberated on setting up a panel to debate the issue but on August 24, it said no legislation or judicial order can stop the freebies culture "unless there is a conscious decision to stop it" emanating from political parties.

"It is only the political parties that make the promises (for freebies). Individuals do not have much importance in such a scenario... Such promises are part of political ideologies, political parties' manifesto, etc,” CJI Ramana said.

The bench also suggested that the government call an all-party meeting to debate the issue or set up a panel with representatives from all parties as well as constitutional and statutory bodies.

The suggestion came after a detailed discussion in the courtroom between the bench and all the counsels on who would head the panel.

While the petitioner favoured a retired judge, Mehta recommended the issue be looked into by the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India (CAG).

Amicus curiae Kapil Sibal, who is assisting the court in the case, said a committee set up by the Centre may face resistance from states.

The court then decided to first review the 2013 order.