Freebies, welfare schemes different: Supreme Court
New Delhi(PTI): Observing that freebies and social welfare schemes are two different things, the Supreme Court on Thursday said a balance has to be struck between the economy losing money and welfare measures.
It also ruled out the possibility of considering a plea for de-recognising parties for making promises to give freebies.
Asking stakeholders to give suggestions on this aspect before August 17, a bench comprising Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justice Krishna Murari said the idea to de-recognise political parties for making promises to give irrational freebies during the polls was undemocratic .
I do not want to enter the area of de-registering a political party etc. as it is an undemocratic idea...We are a democracy after all, the CJI, speaking for the bench, said.
The CJI said the issue of promise to grant irrational freebies during the poll process is a serious issue but he will not encroach into the legislative domain even if there was a statutory vacuum on the issue.
You can call me reluctant or conservative but I do not want to encroach upon the legislative domain...I am a strict orthodox. I do not want to encroach on the areas meant for the legislature. This is a serious issue. It is not an easy thing. Let us hear others also, the bench said.
The CJI, who is demitting office on August 26, said some suggestions have been made by senior lawyers and asked the remaining parties to do the needful before his retirement and fixed the case for further hearing on August 17.
Freebies and the social welfare scheme are different...Economy losing the money and the welfare of people, both have to be balanced and that is why, this debate. There must be someone who can put their vision and thoughts. Please submit something before my retirement, the CJI said.
The top court was hearing a PIL filed by lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, which opposes the practice of political parties promising freebies during elections and seeks the Election Commission to invoke its powers to freeze their election symbols and cancel their registration.
Taking note of the submissions of senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for Upadhyay, the bench said it is a serious issue and those who are getting (the freebies), they want it. Ours is a welfare state. Some may say that they are paying taxes and it has to be used for developmental processes...So both sides have to be heard by committee.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said, Distribution of freebies has been elevated to the level of an art by some parties recently. Elections are fought only on this plank. It is unfortunate that in the country's election spectrum some parties understand that distribution of free things is the only way of welfare measures' for the society. This understanding is completely unscientific and will lead to an economic disaster."
The top law officer gave the example of the stressed' electricity sector and said many power generating and distribution companies are PSUs and are under severe financial stress.
Till the time, either the legislature or the poll panel steps in, the top court must lay down "dos and don'ts" for political parties in larger national interest."
At the outset, the CJI took strong note of the publication of the poll panel's additional affidavit in newspapers saying it reached the media before the judges got to see it.
We have to read the counter affidavits of the Election Commission in the newspapers and we have not received it till late last night...Please give affidavits to newspapers only, the bench said.
Senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the poll panel, said it was filed online and the copies were supplied to other parties as well.
How does it reach newspapers and not us? What is there to read in the Election Commission affidavit now, the bench quipped before proceeding to hear the matter.
The poll panel, in its August 10 additional affidavit, told the Supreme Court that it welcomed the suggestion of setting up an expert panel to brainstorm the issue of freebies announced during elections, but it, being a constitutional authority , be not made part of it which may have some government bodies.
It also referred to the reported strong oral observations of the top court against it during the last hearing on the PIL on the issue, saying they have caused irreparable damage to the reputation of this institution built over the years' '.
On August 3, the top court, while asking stakeholders like the Centre, Niti Aayog, Finance Commission to brainstorm on the issue of freebies, had hinted that it may order setting up a mechanism for suggesting measures to the government to deal with the issue.
The Election Commission and the government cannot say that we cannot do anything about this. They have to consider the issue and give suggestions, the bench had said.
Earlier on July 26, the bench had termed as "serious" the promise of "irrational freebies" made by political parties during elections and wondered why the Centre was hesitant about taking a stand on the issue.
The top court had on January 25 sought replies from the Centre and the Election Commission on the PIL, filed by lawyer and BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay, seeking direction to seize the symbol or deregister a political party that promises or distributes "irrational freebies" before polls, saying it is a "serious issue" as sometimes freebie budget is going beyond regular budget .
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Vinesh Phogat secures women's 50kg Paris Olympics quota for India
Bishkek (Kyrgyzstan), Apr 20: Looking as dominant as ever, Vinesh Phogat on Saturday locked Paris Olympics quota in women's 50kg category, reaching the final at the Asian Olympic Qualifier without conceding a single point, here Saturday.
It is India's second quota place for the Paris Games as Antim Panghal had earned a quota in the 53kg category with her bronze medal winning show at the World Championships last year.
The 29-year-old Vinesh has now secured her third straight Olympic quota, having featured in Rio Games (2016) and in Tokyo (2020) earlier.
Vinesh, who was a prominent face of protest against former WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, dished out a strong performance, demolishing her opponents one by one.
As is her wont, Vinesh looked for that one opportunity to subdue Miran Cheon in her opening bout and grabbed it after measuring her Korean rival for about 30 seconds.
Once she grabbed Cheon and pushed her down for a take down, the bout ended in a jiffy, in one minute and 39 seconds.
It was difficult to wriggle out of Vinesh's strong hold. The Indian employed gut wrench move thrice and mixed that with one 'expose' to finish the bout.
The next bout lasted a mere 67 seconds. Cambodia's Smanang Dit was an easy prey. Vinesh pinned her in no time to move to the women's 50kg semifinal.
The celebrated Indian faced some resistance from 19-year-old Kazakh wrestler Laura Ganikyzy in the semifinals but she used all her experience to foil the attacks employed by her younger rival.
Twice Laura went for left-leg attacks but Vinesh scored on counter and led 4-0 by the end of the first period. This was the first time Vinesh was pushed to the second period in this tournament.
Once Vinesh got hold of Laura, she had no problem in employing consecutive gut wrench moves to finish the bout.
Vinesh was competing in the 50kg category after winning the selection trials.
The finalists at this competition are being awarded quota places for the 2024 Summer Olympics.
India can secure three more quotas through Anshu Malik (57kg), Mansi Ahlawat (62kg) and Reetika (76kg) as they have also reached the semifinals in their respective categories.
The 2021 World Championship silver medallist Anshu had no problem while putting it across Kyrgyzstan's Kalmira Bilimbekova in the quarterfinal, winning by technical superiority.
The U23 world champion Reetika did not have to break much sweat in outclassing Eunju Hwang.
She won the first round by technical superiority as the Korean had no answer to Reetika's class and got a similar win under her belt against Mongolia's Davaanasan Enkh Amar.
In the final group bout against China's Juang Wang, Reetika raced to a 8-0 lead but the Chinese fought back and logged six straight points.
She effected another move at the dying moments but much to the relief of the Indian camp, that point was not awarded because it came at the end of the stipulated time.
Mansi also made it to last-four as she needed to win just one bout. Up against Kazakhstan's Irina Kuznetsova, she emerged a 6-4 winner.
The only Indian wrestler who could not reach semifinals was Nisha Dahiya (68kg).
Nisha had to work hard for her opening win against Sol Gum Pak from North Korea. The Indian had raced to a 5-0 lead and maintained that till the first period, but the Korean put the pressure back on her rival with a strong resistance.
Immediately at the start of the second period, Pak successfully got a take-down move to get on to the scoreboard. However, Nisha kept pushing Pak out to extend her lead and eventually won 8-3.
Already exhausted, Nisha was outclassed by local favourite Meerim Zhumanazarova in round 2, in which she suffered a heavy defeat.
After falling behind 1-9, she was pinned by Meerim. Nisha could hardly employ any attacking move, and was mostly involved in standing wrestling.
In the must-win round 3, Nisha overpowered Kazakhstan's Yelena Shalygina but with Meerim losing her final group bout, Nisha did not have enough points to stay in top-four.
The last chance to win the Paris Games quota will be at the World Qualifiers in Turkey from May 9.
