Delhi High Court Declines Urgent Listing of PIL Against Freebies in Elections

New Delhi: On Monday, February 3, 2025, a petition seeking urgent listing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Justice (Retd.) S.N. Dhingra was mentioned before the Division Bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela of the Delhi High Court.

Appearing for the petitioner, Advocates Siddhartha Borgohain and Harshvardhan Sharma stressed the importance of ensuring free and fair elections by preventing voters from being influenced through cash inducements allegedly offered by the respondent political parties - AAP, BJP and Congress. 
However, the bench did not find the matter urgent enough for immediate listing, stating that it would be heard in the normal course whenever scheduled.

Also Read -  Justice S.N. Dhingra Moves Delhi HC against AAP & other  political parties over Poll Freebies & Bribery [Read PIL]

The petitioner’s counsel sought an urgent hearing at 2:00 PM, but the request was declined. Chief Justice Upadhyaya questioned the urgency, remarking, “Why 2 PM? You are challenging the actions of political parties in announcing freebies. Tomorrow is the last day for electioneering, or perhaps today. Whatever impact the freebies were to have has already happened.” He further stated, “It will be listed as per the standing order. We are not commenting on the merits of the case.”

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the announcement of freebies by political parties violated the spirit of the Constitution and that the entire election process was being conducted in contravention of the law laid down by the Supreme Court.

The matter is now listed on February 12, 2025.

The petitioner in this case, Justice (retd) SN Dhingra had first made headlines as a trial court judge, awarding the death sentence to Parliament attack accused Afzal Guru. He had also probed Robert Vadra’s land deal. He was appointed as the chairman of the SIT looking into the closed cases of the 1984 Sikh riots. He was elevated as Delhi HC judge in 2006 and retired from Delhi HC in 2011.

With just a few days left before Delhi votes for the Assembly elections on February 5, he has moved the court against the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP), Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and Indian National Congress (INC) over their political promises linked to monetary support schemes. The PIL is also seeking that cash-oriented schemes be declared unconstitutional and classified as election manipulation. 

In his PIL, Justice (retd) Dhingra is seeking directions from the HC to the three national parties to “cease and desist from collecting personal and electoral data of voters under false pretence” and that they are directed to not share and use the data collected during elections to any third party.

It is also seeking directions to the Election Commission of India to frame rules for political parties over promises related to monetary support schemes, to conduct an inquiry into “corrupt practices and illegal data collection”, and to strengthen monitoring mechanisms to prevent violation of electoral laws. 

In the PIL before the HC, he also highlighted that the AAP, under its scheme of Mukhyamantri Mahila Samman Yojana, has promised Rs 2,100 as direct bank transfers each month to female voters of Delhi even as the Delhi government’s Department of Women and Child Development has denied such a scheme, and in competing with the same, other parties too have promised similar sops.

Noting that there are around 71.73 lakh female voters in Delhi, the PIL states, “The proposed distribution of Rs 2,100 per month to female voters as promised by respondent parties would result in a financial burden of more than Rs 18,000 crore per annum. This constitutes over 23% of the State of Delhi’s total annual budget, which is Rs 76,000 crore approximately for one fiscal year… such promises in place of vote-seeking constitute corrupt practices under Section 123(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951,as this seeks to unduly influence voters and amount to bribing the voters. Furthermore, the distribution of guarantee cards amounts to unauthorised election-related materials violates Section 127A of the Act.”