SUPREME COURT SEEKS RESPONSE ON PETITION QUESTIONING KARNATAKA CM SIDDARAMAIAH’S ELECTION OVER ALLEGED FREEBIE PROMISES:

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a petition challenging the election of Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah from the Varuna constituency in the 2023 State Assembly elections. The matter came up before a bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta. Although the bench initially appeared inclined to dismiss the petition, it later issued notice after being informed that the legal question on whether pre-election promises constitute corrupt electoral practice is currently pending consideration before a larger bench.

During the hearing, the bench was apprised that the judgment in S. Subramaniam Balaji v. State of Tamil Nadu (2013) 9 SCC 659 –, which dealt with political parties offering welfare benefits in election manifestos, is under reconsideration before a three-judge bench. The counsel appearing pointed out that another coordinate bench headed by Justice M.M. Sundresh had issued notice in a similar matter earlier in the day. In view of these developments, the present bench considered it appropriate to seek a response from the parties.

At one point during the hearing, Justice Vikram Nath questioned how merely declaring election promises in a manifesto could amount to corrupt practice under election law. The court observed that, ordinarily, promises made to the electorate are part of political campaigning and expression of policy, prompting the question of whether they could be treated at par with bribery or inducement prohibited under the Representation of the People Act.

The petition has been filed by a voter from the Varuna constituency, who had earlier approached the Karnataka High Court with the same allegations. His plea was dismissed by the High Court, following which he approached the Supreme Court. The petitioner contends that Siddaramaiah and his party violated election law by allegedly distributing inducements in the form of promised welfare schemes. He seeks that the election of Siddaramaiah be declared void and further prays for his disqualification from contesting elections for a period of six years.

Central to the petitioner’s grievance is the set of election promises popularly referred to as the “five guarantees” announced by the Congress party in its manifesto prior to the 2023 elections. These include the ‘Gruha Jyothi’ scheme guaranteeing 200 units of free electricity to all households, ‘Gruha Lakshmi’ involving monthly assistance of Rs.2,000 to every woman heading a family, ‘Anna Bhagya’ ensuring 10 kilograms of food grains per month to each member of below poverty line households, ‘Yuva Nidhi’ offering monthly unemployment allowance of Rs.3,000 to graduates and Rs.1,500 to diploma holders, and ‘Uchita Prayana/Shakti’ providing free bus travel for women in State-run public transport.

According to the petitioner, the announcement of such financial benefits amounts to offering freebies to influence voters and therefore constitutes a corrupt practice. He has argued that schemes like the Shakti free-travel programme violate Article 14 of the Constitution by creating an unreasonable classification that excludes men from its benefits. The petition asserts that public money cannot be promised selectively during elections in a manner that allegedly distorts the fairness of the electoral process. After hearing the preliminary submissions, the Supreme Court issued notice and sought responses, marking the beginning of judicial examination into whether pre-election welfare promises may cross the threshold into legally prohibited electoral inducement. The matter will now be taken up further after replies are filed by the concerned parties.