Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+====== Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India — Electoral Bonds (2024) ======
+{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(Electoral Bonds judgment 2024, ADR Supreme Court electoral bonds, anonymous political funding India, Article 19(1)(a) right to know, electoral bonds RTI, rti right to information india)
+metatag-description=(Supreme Court Constitution Bench judgment striking down the Electoral Bonds Scheme (2024) — the right to know political funding as an Article 19(1)(a) freedom, and the reasoning that strengthens the RTI Act's transparency spine.)}}
+{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
+<WRAP center round didyouknow 95%>
+**Did you know?** The Electoral Bonds Scheme was introduced via an unusual legislative route — as a money bill, bypassing the Rajya Sabha. The Supreme Court's 2024 ruling struck down not just the scheme but also the amendments that enabled it, **restoring disclosure requirements** across the Companies Act, the Income Tax Act, and the Representation of the People Act.
+</WRAP>
+<WRAP center round info 95%>
+**In one line.** A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court struck down the **Electoral Bonds Scheme, 2018** as unconstitutional, holding that the **voters' right to know the source of a political party's funding** is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) that cannot be abridged on the ground of donor privacy.
+**What that means in practice for RTI.**
+  * The **right to information** is explicitly Article 19(1)(a) ground — reinforcing the foundation on which the RTI Act, 2005 sits.
+  * Anonymity of donors to political parties is not a legitimate State interest outweighing the voter's right to know.
+  * **Institutional integrity** is a public-interest factor of first order in Section 8(2) balancing.
+</WRAP>
+===== Citation =====
+//Association for Democratic Reforms and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.//, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 880 of 2017 and connected matters.\\
+**Bench:** Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, Justice Manoj Misra (five-judge Constitution Bench).\\
+**Date of judgment:** 15 February 2024.
+===== The scheme and the challenge =====
+The Electoral Bonds Scheme, 2018 was introduced through amendments to the **Finance Act, 2017**, which in turn modified the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the Companies Act, 2013, and the Income Tax Act, 1961. The scheme allowed:
+  * Any individual or company to purchase **bearer bonds** from the State Bank of India in denominations up to Rs 1 crore.
+  * The bonds were redeemable only by registered political parties within fifteen days.
+  * The scheme **exempted political parties from disclosing** the names of donors who gave through this route.
+  * Companies could contribute **without disclosure obligations under the Companies Act** for electoral bonds.
+ADR and other petitioners challenged the scheme on multiple grounds, principally Article 19(1)(a) — the voter's right to know the source of political funding.
+===== What the Supreme Court held =====
+==== Article 19(1)(a) and the right to know ====
+The Court held that the **right to information** about political funding is an integral facet of the freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a). A voter's ability to evaluate a political party — its likely policies, its likely capture by donor interests — depends on access to funding information.
+==== Anonymity does not survive proportionality ====
+The State argued that donor anonymity was necessary to protect donors from retaliation. The Court applied the //Puttaswamy// proportionality test and rejected this justification — donor anonymity in **political funding** is not the same as privacy of personal data. The scheme failed the least-restrictive-alternative leg of the test.
+==== Retrospective disclosure ====
+The Court directed the State Bank of India to disclose all electoral bond data to the Election Commission of India, which was in turn directed to publish the data on its website. This operational direction produced the widely-discussed public release in March 2024.
+===== Implications for the RTI Act =====
+  * **Article 19(1)(a) foundation reaffirmed.** The RTI Act, 2005 is rooted in this fundamental right. The Electoral Bonds judgment re-anchors that link.
+  * **Public interest in institutional integrity.** Where RTI applicants argue that disclosure serves democratic accountability, the Electoral Bonds reasoning is directly on point.
+  * **Privacy is not a one-way shield.** Even after //Puttaswamy//, privacy does not automatically defeat transparency claims. The **proportionality test runs both ways**.
+===== Related on this site =====
+  * [[:act|The RTI Act, 2005 — current text]]. Preamble and Article 19(1)(a) basis.
+  * [[explanations:public-interest|Public interest]].
+  * [[explanations:privacy|Privacy under RTI]].
+  * [[important-decisions:k-s-puttaswamy-vs-union-of-india|K.S. Puttaswamy (2017)]] — privacy framework.
+  * [[important-decisions:cbse-and-anr-vs-aditya-bandopadhyay|CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011)]] — disclosure default.
+  * [[blog:rti-act-decade-of-change-2015-2025|A decade of change, 2015 to 2025]].
+  * [[important-decisions:start|Case law library]].
+===== Status vs the 14 November 2025 DPDP amendment =====
+The Electoral Bonds judgment operates at the **constitutional** level — Article 19(1)(a) — and is unaffected by the DPDP Rules, 2025 substitution of Section 8(1)(j). Its reasoning in fact strengthens the transparency side of the post-DPDP balancing under Section 8(2).
+===== Sources =====
+  - //Association for Democratic Reforms and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.//, W.P. (C) 880 of 2017 and connected matters, Supreme Court of India, decided 15 February 2024.
+  - Constitution of India, Article 19(1)(a).
+  - The Finance Act, 2017; Companies Act, 2013; Representation of the People Act, 1951; Income Tax Act, 1961.
+  - //Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India//, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
+===== Last reviewed on =====
+April 2026
+{{tag>rti case-law supreme-court constitution-bench electoral-bonds article-19 adr 2024}}

Was this page helpful?