Plea in Delhi HC seeks CBI probe into allegations of corruption through electoral bonds

New Delhi, Oct 7 (PTI) A plea before the Delhi High Court on Monday sought a court-monitored investigation by the CBI into the alleged instances of quid pro quo and corruption in donations made through electoral bonds by individuals or companies to various political parties.
    A bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela granted time to the petitioner to file a note on the maintainability of his petition and the legal position on the issue.
    The court then listed the matter on October 29.
    The petition has been filed by one Sudip Narayan Tamankar, who claims to be an activist espousing the cause of public interest. The plea seeks a direction for a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into his complaint dated April 18, 2024.
    During the hearing, the high court raised questions on the petition and orally stated the payment had been made pursuant to an Act of Parliament, and therefore, it cannot be presumed or assumed that the same was done for a “collateral purpose”.
    The bench noted that Tamankar had made a similar plea before the Supreme Court, which disposed it of on August 2 after observing that individual grievances of such nature regarding the presence or absence of quid pro quo would have to be pursued based on the remedies available under the law.
    On August 2, the top court rejected a batch of pleas seeking a court-monitored investigation into the electoral bonds scheme while observing that it cannot order a roving inquiry.
    The apex court said it would be “premature” and “inappropriate” to order a probe under a retired judge when the remedies available under the ordinary law governing criminal law procedure have not been invoked.
    It said it cannot order a roving inquiry into the purchase of electoral bonds on the assumption of a quid pro quo for the award of contract.
    The apex court had also said that where there is a refusal to investigate or a closure report has been filed, recourse can be taken to appropriate remedies under the law governing criminal procedure or Article 226 of the Constitution.
    The high court, on Monday, perused the top court’s order and said since the Supreme Court was of the view that the allegations were based on assumptions, the observation will squarely apply to the high court while dealing with a petition filed under Article 226.
    “Your case is based on an assumption. It is very difficult to send the case to the CBI. How can we send the case to the CBI on assumptions? For assumptions you have to go to the local police,” the bench stated.
    The petitioner, represented by advocate Pranav Sachdeva, argued neither was there an update from the CBI, nor any action on his representation.
    “Hence, it can be stated that the CBI is unable to start the investigation. It is submitted that the CBI has apparently refused to take any action in relation to investigating the allegations provided in the petitioner’s complaint, and hence, the petitioner is exercising the liberty granted by the Supreme Court to claim reliefs under Article 226 before this court,” the plea said.
    The bench, however, said the petitioner must exercise his alternative remedies under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for the matter can be investigated by the local police.
    “The normal process of law would be Section 156(3) of CrPC only. They (Supreme Court) are not saying that the CBI must investigate. Otherwise, the Supreme Court would have dealt with the matter itself… Would the reasoning, which the Supreme Court gave for not entertaining an Article 32 (petition), also not apply squarely to us not entertaining an Article 226 and relegating you to the ordinary criminal procedure?” asked the high court.
    Tamankar, in his plea, said the "electoral bond scheme" created an opaque electoral funding veil for quid pro quo arrangements between corporate entities and the political parties.
    A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court had on February 15 scrapped the electoral bonds scheme of anonymous political funding introduced by the BJP government.
    Following the top court's judgement, the State Bank of India, the authorised financial institution under the scheme, shared the data with the EC, which later made it public.
    The electoral bonds scheme, which was notified by the government on January 2, 2018, was pitched as an alternative to cash donations made to political parties as part of its efforts to bring in transparency in political funding.

(This story has not been edited by THE WEEK and is auto-generated from PTI)