NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to consider a plea for a court monitored SIT probe under the supervision of a retired SC judge into the alleged instances of quid pro quo arrangement and award of contracts in lieu of huge donations to political parties through the Electoral Bond Scheme.
A bench of Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said any probe ordered by this court would be far fetched, inappropriate and premature. Such a probe would be a roving inquiry into the purchase of EBs on basis of assumptions only.
"Individual grievances with regard to the presence or absence of a quid pro quo would have to be pursued on the basis of the remedies available under the law," the bench said.
The court noted that even according to the petitioners an element of uncertainty is involved where there is a proximate relationship between the purchase of the bonds and the award of the contract or change in policy, or commission or omission maybe by the authorities.
The court also said when a closure report is filed, recourse can be taken through appropriate remedies under the law governing criminal procedure.
The bench declined to consider petitions filed by NGOs, Common Cause and CPIL and by Jai Prakash Sharma, Sudip Tamankar and Dr Khem Singh Bhati.
The petitioners claimed that the scheme of anonymous donations through EBs, which was struck down by the SC on February 14, has a large ramifications on Indian democracy and politics.
Also Read: SC to hear on July 22 plea for SIT probe into quid pro quo in Electoral Bonds Scheme
During the hearing, the court said setting up a probe team will be a far-fetched roving enquiry.
“What will SIT do based on quid pro quo,” the court asked Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who said there is a prima facie evidence as per the data on the Election Commission’s website regarding the purchase of electoral bonds.
Bhushan contended there is an example when a company purchased electoral bonds and a contract was awarded to it.
He asked how an FIR can be lodged in such cases and some officers of the investigating agencies may be involved in the underlying arrangement.
The bench said the court would have to see what the material on record in connection with allegations of quid pro quo.
Bhushan said rival companies do not want to bring this to light because they fear that they may be blacklisted in the future as some investigative journalists unearthed the facts connected with this matter.
However, the bench said that setting up the SIT is not the only answer.
Bhushan said a probe team headed by a retired judge would be neutral and if it is quid pro quo then it becomes proceeds of crime, and it is like theft and material needs to be recovered.
"No political party can be allowed to sit on money which they received by kickback or bribes through the electoral bonds scheme, therefore they should return the funds," he said.
In such circumstances, only credible probe will be under the watchful eyes of this court, he said.
The bench, however, asked him when there are remedies available, and how this court can intervene in such a scenario.
In April, 2024, a PIL was filed jointly by NGOs 'Common Cause' and 'Centre for Public Interest Litigation' through advocate Bhushan which claimed the bulk of the bonds appeared to have been given as quid pro quo arrangements by corporates to political parties for getting contracts or licences or leases or clearances or approvals worth thousands and sometimes lakhs of crores.
Also Read: Plea in SC seeks SIT probe into 'Electoral Bonds scam'
The plea asked the Supreme Court to direct an SIT probe into alleged pay offs and quid pro quo arrangements between corporates and governments, "shockingly, in conspiracy with investigative and regulatory bodies, as revealed in donations made to political parties through the Electoral Bonds Scheme".
On PILs by NGO Association for Democratic Reforms and others, the Supreme Court's five-judge Constitution bench had on February 15, 2024 quashed the Electoral Bonds scheme and directed the SBI to provide all the data related to it to the Election Commission for uploading on its website.
It was revealed that electoral bonds worth about Rs 16,518 crore were encashed by the political parties.
Another petition was filed for a direction to confiscate the money received by political parties under the scheme.
This plea filed by Bhati sought a direction to set up a committee headed by a former judge of the apex court to investigate the alleged "illegal benefits" conferred on the donors by public authorities.
