The State Bank of India has not provided information on electoral bonds encashed by political parties as of March 6, missing the Supreme Court's deadline, PTI reported.
The bank had on March 4 requested an extension until June 30 to disclose details, but the plea has not yet been scheduled for a hearing by the apex court. In its plea, SBI argued that retrieving information from various sources and matching data between silos would be time-consuming.
SBI has not yet shared any details with the Election Commission of India (EC), as it was supposed to as per the SC order on February 15, sources told PTI. In the same order, the EC has been directed to publish the disclosed information on its official website by March 13.
An Election Commission spokesperson declined to provide information or comments on the matter, PTI said.
SC had asked SBI to stop issuing Electoral Bonds immediately after its January verdict and given March 6 as the deadline to furnish the asked details.
The details that the SBI will furnish will disclose details of each electoral bond encashed by the political parties, which shall include the date of encashment and the denomination of the electoral bond. The apex court said that by March 13, the ECI shall publish the details of Electoral Bonds on its official website.
The Supreme Court on February 15 had pronounced its verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the validity of the Electoral Bond scheme, which allows for anonymous funding to political parties.
The top court struck down the electoral bonds scheme calling it unconstitutional. A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud delivered two separate but unanimous verdicts on pleas challenging the scheme.
The Supreme Court said infringement of the Right to Information is not justified to curb black money. “There are other alternatives which substantially fulfil the purpose and impact the right to information minimally when compared to the impact of electoral bonds on the right to information," SC said as quoted by LiveLaw.
Pronouncing the verdict, the CJI said the scheme is violative of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The bench said the fundamental right to privacy includes citizens’ right to political privacy and affiliation.
It added that the scheme will help the party in power to gain an advantage. "There is also a legitimate possibility that financial contributions to a political party would lead to a quid pro quo arrangement because of the close nexus between money and politics, SC said.
(With inputs from PTI)
Catch all the Business News , Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.