Supreme Court on Thursday observed the issue of 'freebies' during poll campaigns is a serious issue. Outgoing Chief Justice of India NV Ramana said the welfare of the people must be balanced against the loss to the economy while suggesting that financial discipline must be practiced.
In a country like India where there is poverty, we cannot ignore that issue, CJI Ramana said.
The CJI noted that in a country like India "where there is poverty" the Central government "may have plans to feed hungry", while the state may also introduce welfare measures. In such a case, the "people's welfare has to be balanced" while maintaining fiscal discipline, the bench remarked.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, said there was a difference between welfare measure and freebies. The freebies culture has been elevated to the level of art and now elections are fought on this ground alone, he said.
"If we say that freebies are the only welfare for the people, then that's a serious issue and leading the country on the road to an economic disaster," Mehta added.
The top court was hearing a plea filed by BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay who sought to cancel the freebies culture during poll campaigns. During the hearing, the top court clarified that it was not considering the idea to de-register political parties promising freebies.
"I do not want to enter the area of de registering political party etc as it's an undemocratic arena. We are a democracy after all," CJI NV Ramana said.
Also Read: Explained: Who Is Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Ex BJP Spokesperson
Freebies versus welfare measures
During the hearing, the Supreme Court's primary concern was the extent to which it could interfere in the issue at hand. CJI Ramana observed the issue was emotional and the top court should not decide on this issue without hearing experts since there was a difference between 'freebies' and 'welfare'.
"I can't ignore the amount of debate in the news and social media. The question is to what extent can we [SC] interfere in this issue? It is the wisdom of all people we have to take into account. We have to maintain financial discipline when we look at other nations," CJI Ramana said.
Senior advocate Arvind Datar, representing one of the petitioners, said it was unlikely that the committee, proposed during the last hearing, would be able to help in this matter. Datar said the top court in its 2002 Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) judgment—where it directed MPs/MLAs to declare their assets—had given positive directions while raising the bar for free and fair elections to the level of basic doctrine.
Senior advocate AM Singhvi, representing the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) said the confusion between freebies and welfare stemmed from the misuse of the word 'freebies'. Welfare measures were a political bargain between the electorate and the elected. "Thus we have formulated the universal adult franchise. Judicial reassessment makes the court enter into a political thicket which it has refused to do earlier," he said.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who was asked by the court to assist in this matter, said this was a complex issue which could not be decided without considering data. Recalling an interaction, Sibal spoke about an employee who said she couldn't take the roads yesterday because of Muharram and she didn't have money for the metro. She takes the bus because it is free, Sibal said adding: "Now is that a freebie?"
