Electoral Bonds: Delhi High Court Questions Maintainability Of Plea Seeking CBI Probe Into 'Corruption' In Donations To Political Parties

The Delhi High Court on Monday questioned the maintainability of a petition seeking a court monitored Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the instances of “quid pro quo and corruption” by way of donations made through electoral bonds by individuals or companies to various political parties.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela orally remarked that the payment has been made pursuance to an Act of the Parliament, and therefore, it cannot be presumed or assumed that the same has been done for “collateral purpose.”

The plea is filed by Sudip Narayan Tamankar who claims to be an activist espousing causes of public interest.

During the hearing today, the bench noted that Tamankar had filed a petition before the Supreme Court with a similar prayer which was disposed of on August 02, observing that individual grievances of such nature in regard to the presence or absence of quid pro quo would have to be pursued on the basis of the remedies available under the law.

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 of India.

Thus, the bench today said that since the Supreme Court was of the view that the allegations were based on assumptions, the said observation will squarely apply to the High Court while dealing with a petition filed under Article 226.

““There is an Act in place. It says you can give money. Therefore, this is the two problems we are having. One is, that it has been done in pursuance to an Act of Parliament and number two, Supreme Court says it is based on assumptions and presumption,” the bench remarked,” the Chief Justice remarked.

He added: “If it is based on assumptions, how can we send an allegation on assumptions to the CBI?”

Referring to a Karnataka High Court judgment, the bench also remarked that CBI probe cannot be ordered in a routine manner and the same can be done only in rare and compelling cases.

The bench asked Tamankar's counsel, Advocate Pranav Sachdeva, to file a short note on the legal point as well as on maintainability of the petition. 

This was after Sachdeva insisted that the matter can be investigated by the CBI. He also argued that the Lalita Kumari judgment applies to CBI as well and that he will file a note in support of his submissions.

However, the bench remarked that Tamankar must exercise his alternative remedies under Section 153(6) of CrPC or BNSS, stating that the matter can be investigated by the local police.

“The normal process of law would be Section 156(3) only. They (Supreme Court) are not saying that CBI must investigate. otherwise the Supreme Court would have dealt with the matter itself…. The reasoning which the Supreme Court has given for not entertaining an Article 32 (petition), would it also not apply squarely to us not entertaining an Article 226 and relegating you to the ordinary criminal procedure? ,” the bench said.

The matter will now be heard on October 29.

As per Tamankar, the electoral bond scheme created an “opaque electoral funding veil” for quid pro quo arrangements between corporate entities and the political parties.

It is his case that after the disclosure of the electoral bond information pursuant to Supreme Court ruling, it came to light that various donations would need thorough investigation as the same indicate “corruption and bribery.”

The plea says that Tamankar collated publicly available information and filed a detailed complaint to the CBI on April 18 seeking an investigation into the alleged corruption disclosed in the electoral bond data.

However, it is his case, that no action has been taken by the CBI into his complaint and that the probe agency has not even acknowledged that the complaint was received.

“The evidence indicates quid pro quo arrangements among political entities, corporations, Government officials investigative and regulatory bodies. Information shows significant sums moving from corporate entities to political parties. These exchanges are presented either as "protection money" to evade Government oversight, as "bribes" to gain contracts or competitive advantages in the relevant market through statutory amendments,” the plea says.

It adds that companies under regulatory scrutiny from agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) or Income Tax (IT) Department have made substantial contributions to ruling parties through electoral bonds.

“Electoral bonds worth Rs. 581 crores have been purchased by several loss making companies, of which 434 crores given to ruling party at the Centre. The Income Tax Department, CBI and Enforcement Directorate have not taken any legal action against them. The share capital of some companies were from Rs.1 to 5 lakhs but bonds purchased are worth Rs. 5 crores,” the plea said.

“It is submitted that despite the completion of 3 months from the date of the cited order, there has been no action or update on the investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation. The investigation is being sought due to a range of quid pro quo transactions between political parties, government servants and Corporates,” it reads.

Title: SUDIP NARAYAN TAMANKAR v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.