The provision of freebies by political parties during election campaigns has become a subject of intense legal scrutiny and public debate in India. Recent developments highlight a clash between welfare initiatives and concerns regarding fiscal responsibility and electoral ethics. A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the High Court of Karnataka by four retired military personnel challenges the announcement of freebies by political parties, characterizing such acts as "cash for votes" under the Representation of the Peoples Act. The petitioners argue that promising freebies, such as the Gruha Lakshmi, Gruha Jyothi, and Shakti Yojane schemes promised by the Indian National Congress party in Karnataka, creates trends that undermine free and fair elections and strain the country's economy. The petition names the Election Commission of India, union and state governments, and political parties including BJP, Congress, and JD(S) as respondents.
Simultaneously, the Supreme Court of India has agreed to hear a separate PIL challenging the practice of political parties promising freebies during elections. This PIL, filed by Bharatiya Janata Party leader and Supreme Court advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, seeks directions for the Election Commission to invoke its powers to freeze election symbols and cancel the registration of parties that promise freebies. The petition argues that such practices are unethical, akin to bribery, and violate the Constitution. The Supreme Court has described the matter as "very important" and has declined to delete it from the cause list.
The debate extends beyond the courtroom into academic and expert discourse. A webinar organized by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) featured experts discussing the "Freebies Culture and its Impact on Indian Politics & Democracy." During the session, Ashwini Upadhyay emphasized that fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy should be secured before making other promises. However, other panelists offered differing perspectives. Dr. Ajit Ranade, Vice Chancellor of the Gokhale Institute of Politics & Economics, questioned whether the PIL before the Supreme Court considered the economic background of beneficiaries. He argued that elements of freebies are inherent in government expenditures such as free vaccines, schools, hospitals, and public transportation, where consumers are not charged the full cost. Dr. Ranade asserted that ensuring basic rights and decreasing inequality cannot be termed a "freebie," and he questioned whether welfare spending under acts like the National Food Security Act, 2005, or the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana falls under the purview of freebies. He noted that the term "freebie" carries a pejorative and negative connotation.
Furthermore, the political response to these legal challenges has been active. The DMK argued before the Supreme Court that welfare schemes designed to minimize income inequalities and provide free services cannot be construed as freebies. The debate was ignited by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's criticism of a "revdi culture," which he described as dangerous for the youth and the country's development prospects. The precise definition of a "freebie" versus a "subsidy" or "welfare scheme" remains a central point of contention in these ongoing legal and political discussions.
Conclusion
The legal landscape regarding political freebies in India is currently evolving through multiple PILs in the High Court of Karnataka and the Supreme Court. While petitioners argue that promising freebies constitutes "cash for votes" and violates constitutional provisions, experts and opposing political entities contend that welfare schemes aimed at securing fundamental rights and reducing inequality are distinct from electoral bribes. The Supreme Court has recognized the significance of these matters, ensuring that the debate over the definition, scope, and legality of freebies will continue to be a focal point of Indian jurisprudence and political discourse.
Sources
- ‘Cash for votes’: Retired soldiers challenge freebies by parties in PIL in Karnataka HC
- The limits of freebies, as discussed by experts at a recent webinar
- Amaravati: A maelstrom has been brewing in the political landscape over the precise markers of a subsidy and a freebie
- Supreme Court says PIL against freebies promised by political parties in elections very important
- SC agrees to list PIL against practice of parties promising freebies during polls