Supreme Court Rules Party Manifesto Financial Help Not a Corrupt Practice

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has clarified that commitments made by political parties in their manifestos, which result in direct or indirect financial assistance to the public, do not constitute corrupt practices. This decision came from a bench of Justices Surya Kant and K V Vishwanathan, who dismissed an appeal challenging the election of Karnataka Cabinet Minister B A Zameer Ahmed Khan.

Case Background

The appeal was brought forward by Shashanka J Sreedhara, a voter from the Chamarajpet Assembly constituency, represented by advocate Balaji Srinivasan. The appellant contended that promises made by the Indian National Congress (INC) in its manifesto, specifically the “five guarantees,” amounted to corrupt practices. These guarantees included:

1. Gruha Jyothi: 200 units of free electricity to all households.
2. Gruha Lakshmi: Rs 2,000 monthly to every woman head of the family.
3. Anna Bhagya: 10 kilograms of food grain per person per month for families below the poverty line.
4. Yuva Nidhi: Rs 3,000 per month for two years to unemployed graduates and Rs 1,500 per month for two years to unemployed diploma holders.
5. Shakthi: Free travel for all women throughout the state in KSRTC/BMTC buses.

Supreme Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court bench, after hearing advocates Vishwaditya Sharma and Lakshmi Rao on behalf of the appellant, ruled that the commitments made in a party’s manifesto, even if leading to financial help, do not amount to corrupt practices by the candidates of that party. Justice Surya Kant stated, “The contention of the learned counsel that the commitments by a political party in its manifesto, which eventually lead to direct or indirect financial help to the public at large, will also amount to corrupt practice by a candidate of that party, is too far-fetched and cannot be accepted.”

Implications of the Ruling

The court upheld the Karnataka High Court’s decision from April 25, 2024, dismissing the appeal against Khan’s election. The ruling emphasizes that election promises, even those involving financial benefits to the public, are not inherently corrupt. This decision sets a precedent for future cases where electoral promises are questioned on similar grounds.

Legal and Political Context

This ruling is a landmark in the context of Indian electoral politics, where manifesto promises often include various forms of public welfare schemes. The decision reinforces the legality of such promises, provided they do not violate other election laws.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision clarifies the scope of what constitutes corrupt practices in the context of election promises, ensuring that political parties can offer welfare schemes without the risk of being deemed corrupt. This ruling provides a clearer framework for evaluating future electoral promises and their impact on democratic practices in India.

For comprehensive coverage of legal developments, business news, and real-time updates on law and politics, visit Kanishk Social Media.

 If you like this story, share it with a friend! 

Source Link