Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

A Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India Justice NV Ramana today queried whether universal healthcare, access to drinking water and access to consumer electronics as being promised by political parties can be treated as freebies.

The court, thus, noting that more discussion is required on the aspect as to what constitutes a freebie and what constitutes a welfare scheme, adjourned the matter to August 22, 2022. 

Court was hearing a plea filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay alleging that declaration of distribution of irrational freebies from public funds before elections unduly influences the voters, shakes the roots of free-fair election, disturbs level playing field, vitiates the purity of election process and violates Articles 14, 162, 266(3) and 282 of the Constitution.

When the matter came up for hearing, SG Tushar Mehta, appearing for Union of India, said, "We are not opposed to the idea of socialism, however, social welfare does not mean 'distributing everything for free'. This is indeed an immature understanding of social welfare."

CJI, on reading out the suggestions, observed that political parties cannot be prevented from making promises to the electorate. He said, "Can universal healthcare, access to drinking water, and access to consumer electronics be treated as freebies?"

Speaking of  Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, CJI said, "Schemes like the MGNREGA give the dignity of living. Promises need to be defined as well - what promises are being made by which political party. Also, not all parties get elected when they promise freebies, therefore it can't be the sole reason for coming to power."

Thus, opining that all stakeholders have to be heard at length, the bench adjourned the matter. 

On the last date of hearing, CJI observed that there is a need to maintain a balance between the loss to the exchequer owing to freebies and welfare schemes for the benefit of the people. 

Earlier, CJI had suggested that stakeholders such as RBI, NITI Aayog, opposition parties and those who are for and against freebies should be involved in this process of engaging in constructive brainstorming and they should suggest the court about the formation of a body, which can be constituted by the court to examine the issue.

Court had asked the Government to consider involving the Finance Commission in the issue pertaining to the distribution of freebies by political parties in the vicinity of elections.

The Supreme Court issued notice in the present plea in January 2022

Notably, an application of intervention has been filed by the General Secretary, M.P Mahila Congress, Dr. Jaya Thakur before the Supreme Court in this matter stating that according to our Constitutional Doctrine, ruling parties are duty bound to frame policies for the welfare and upliftment of the weaker sections, so they are rightly giving subsidies which cannot be called freebies.

Moreover, recently, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) also filed an application of intervention contending that this Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a “non-partisan litigation” and alleged petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay’s strong ties to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India & Anr.