Supreme Court Orders SBI to Disclose Unique Numbers of Electoral Bonds !!

After the rebuke of the Supreme Court, some data on electoral bonds has become public but some remain, like the unique (alphanumeric) number of the electoral bond. During a hearing on Friday (March 15), Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud directed SBI to disclose these numbers.

Why is there a demand for a unique number of electoral bonds?

From the data received from SBI on March 14, 2024, which has been published by ECI on its website, it is not possible to know which political party received donations from whom and how much. Currently, two lists of 763 are on the ECI website. A list containing details of the company purchasing the bond, the amount of the bond, and the date of purchase. In the second list, there is a record of how much donation each political party received and at what time.

But from this information, it is not clear which company has donated to which party. With the unique alphanumeric number becoming public, this will also be possible. This number is printed on every bond.

Who has come from SBI? – CJI

On the morning of March 15, 2024, a petition filed by the Election Commission was heard. At the same time, CJI Chandrachud asked- Who has appeared on behalf of SBI. He has not presented the bond numbers. State Bank of India should present those numbers. Reiterating his point, CJI Chandrachud said that if you look at our judgment, this thing has been specifically mentioned in it. SBI has to give all the information.

I am not here on behalf of SBI – SG

Tushar Mehta, who has been holding the post of Solicitor General since the third extension given by the Central Government, said on the CJI’s comment that SBI was not a part of that decision (on which the hearing was going on). Notice can be issued to SBI.

Meanwhile, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, pointing to the operative part of the court’s decision, said that SBI had to give all the information. After listening to Sibal, the Solicitor General reiterated his point and said that the court could issue notice to SBI. Only he can tell something about this.

The CJI said that he should have been here when the case was listed. We can object to what SBI has done. On Justice Chandrachud’s comment, SG again said what he had said twice before. SG Mehta said, “I have not appeared on behalf of SBI nor am I here for political reasons”.