The court also ordered the ECI to post these facts on their website by March 15 at the latest.
New Delhi: The State Bank of India's (SBI) request for an extension to comply with the court's previous order to provide information about electoral bonds was denied by the Supreme Court on Monday, March 11.
The SBI has been ordered by the court to release the information by the end of work hours on March 12, despite the fact that the bank already has the required information.
The electoral bonds programme was declared unlawful by the Supreme Court on February 15, which also stated that anonymous electoral bonds violate Article 19(1)(a) and the right to information.
As part of the decision, the issuing bank, SBI, was instructed to provide the Election Commission of India with information on electoral bonds acquired since April 12, 2019, by March 6. The SBI, however, requested an extension until June 30 in their appeal, citing the "complexity of decoding and compiling data" from the bond sales. This is far beyond this year's Lok Sabha elections.
In addition to the public sector bank's request for an extension, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), Common Cause, and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) had filed contempt petitions against it for failing to disclose crucial information about the bonds. The bench, which included Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, J.B. Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, was hearing these arguments, according to LiveLaw.
Senior counsel Harish Salve, speaking on behalf of the SBI, stated that the matching exercise's complexity is to blame for the delay. He added that the donor and redemption data of the bonds were kept in distinct information silos.
CJI Chandrachud responded by pointing out that the court's orders only required the bank to reveal the information, not to carry out a "matching exercise." The article stated that the chief justice also mentioned that the bank's KYC data demonstrated that it possessed all the required information. This implies that the SBI is not required to reveal whose bonds were transferred to which parties.
In 26 days, what have you accomplished?
The SBI's silence over the advancements made in the 26 days following the issuance of the judgement was also questioned by the court. Salve promised the court that an affidavit will be filed with the details of the progress. "We rendered our decision on February 15th. It is March 11th today. To what extent have you matched in the last 26 days? On this, the affidavit says nothing. The State Bank of India is expected to be somewhat transparent, the court declared.
Salve informed the court, "We have the details, I'm not saying we don't have them," but then reiterated that the problem stemmed from the siloisation of the data kept by the State Bank of India.
We were informed that information was meant to be kept confidential. That's how we came up with the system. We don't want to make any mistakes right now and cause chaos. Salve quarrelled. Justice Khanna, however, asserted that "there is no question of any mistake." The KYC is with you. In the nation, you are the best bank. We count on you to manage it.
The bank had stated in its submissions that all purchase information was stored at the main location under a sealed cover. Upon pointing this up, Justice Khanna instructed, "Just open the sealed cover, collate the names, and furnish the details."
The SBI is being asked for information regarding the date, buyer's name, and denomination of each electoral bond. Furthermore, information about bonds that political parties had cashed was needed, as well as the date of the encashment.
"The State Bank of India has submitted that the donor details and redemption details are available, albeit in separate silos," the court stated in its final ruling. Stated differently, the directive given by this court compels the bank to reveal data that is already at its disposal.
According to the directive, "We direct the Election Commission of India to compile the information and publish the information on their website no later than by 5 PM on March 15, 2024."
According to the directive, "We direct the Election Commission of India to compile the information and publish the information on their website no later than by 5 PM on March 15, 2024."
The bench further requested that the ECI post on its website the specifics of the data that was provided to the court in compliance with its November 2018 interim ruling. In that ruling, the court had requested information from the ECI regarding the funds that each political party had received through electoral bonds up until September 30 in a sealed cover.
An ECI spokesperson said, "no comments," when questioned about the Supreme Court's new deadline of March 12 for SBI.
Petition for contempt
The court stated that if SBI did not comply with the most recent instructions, it would be likely to take legal action against it for willfully disregarding its order, even if it declined to file contempt charges against the organisation, according to LiveLaw.
The managing director and chair of the State Bank of India will file an affidavit attesting to their compliance with the aforementioned directives. CJI Chandrachud stated, "We place the State Bank of India on notice that this court may be inclined to proceed against it for wilful disobedience if it does not comply with the timelines indicated in this order, even though we are not inclined to exercise the contempt jurisdiction at this time."
ADR and Common Cause's attorney, Prashant Bhushan, filed a request for an expedited hearing on March 7. He asked the court to put the contempt case with the SBI's extension plea, which was set to be heard on March 11.
This petition attempted to hold SBI in contempt and accused the bank of willful disobedience. According to LiveLaw, the petitioners contended that the bank's plea for an extension is "mala fide" and a ploy to obstruct efforts at transparency in front of the approaching Lok Sabha elections.
The petitioners contended that SBI was able to quickly gather and release the information it already had, even as they cited the bank's advanced IT system created to manage these bonds. Subsequently, the CPI (M) also submitted a petition for contempt against the SBI.
#Election Bonds,#Electoral Bonds
إرسال تعليق