In a stern directive, the Supreme Court has refused the State Bank of India’s appeal for an extended deadline to divulge specifics of the electoral bonds scheme, insisting that the bank furnish the details to the Election Commission of India by the following day. The Election Commission has been instructed to subsequently release these details on its website by 5 pm on Friday.
The Supreme Court made clear that failure to comply would result in contempt proceedings against the state-run bank. The SBI had sought additional time until June 30 to provide these details, following a landmark ruling on February 15 which ordered the abolishment of the electoral bonds scheme and mandated public disclosure of donation information by March 13. The SBI’s plea was met with resistance from the Association for Democratic Reforms, which previously challenged the scheme. They argued the request for an extension appeared tactically timed, perhaps to shield disclosure prior to the imminent Lok Sabha elections.
Senior Advocate Harish Salve, representing SBI, detailed the intricate procedures of the electoral bonds scheme, which involved storing information separate from the bank’s core system. The bank expressed the need for additional time due to the complex process of gathering and verifying the donor details. The Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, leading the bench, as well as Justice Sanjiv Khanna, rebuffed the bank’s claim that a time-consuming matching exercise was necessary, pointing out that the court had made no such demand.
During the dialogue in court, there was a stern request for transparency on what the SBI had accomplished in the days following the verdict, wherein the bank was found wanting. Salve contended that a meticulous verification process was vital to avoid legal consequences from donors, underscoring the confidentiality built into the system.
The Supreme Court’s firm stance was echoed by Advocate Prashant Bhushan on behalf of ADR, highlighting that the bank had the requisite data per their affidavit and merely needed to share it with the Election Commission without further delay. The court requested an affidavit from the SBI chairman and held off on contempt, indicating potential consequences should the bank default on its obligations.
With the electoral bonds scheme deemed ‘unconstitutional’ by the Supreme Court for infringing on the right to information, political discourse has swerved towards greater transparency and accountability. Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge welcomed the rejection of SBI’s plea, viewing the Supreme Court ruling as a triumph for democracy and a stride towards unmasking possible corruption linked to anonymous donations afforded by the electoral bonds system. Kharge also entreated the court to deliberate on the larger implications of political donations in relation to government contracts and the usage of federal agencies in procuring donations.