Intention behind electoral bonds scheme was good: Gadkari; says no party can survive sans funds
Ahmedabad (PTI): Union minister Nitin Gadkari has said it was not possible to run a political party without funds, and added that the Centre had introduced the electoral bonds scheme, now struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, in 2017 with a "good intention".
The senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader said all political parties need to sit together and deliberate if the Supreme Court gives any further direction on the matter.
He made the comments at an event organised by a media house in GIFT City near Gandhinagar on Friday.
"When Arun Jaitely was (Union finance) minister, I was part of that discussion (regarding electoral bonds). No party can survive without resources. In some countries, governments fund political parties. There is no such system in India. Thus, we chose this system of financing political parties," said Gadkari on a question about electoral bonds.
He noted the main intention behind introducing electoral bonds was that political parties get funds directly, but the names (of donors) are not disclosed because "problems arise if the party in power changes".
The road transport and highways minister said just like a media house needs a sponsor to finance an event, political parties also require funds to run their affairs.
"You need to see the ground reality. How are parties supposed to fight elections? We brought this system of electoral bonds to bring transparency. So, our intention was good when we brought electoral bonds. If the SC finds any shortcomings in it and asks us to rectify it, all parties will sit together and unanimously deliberate on it," emphasised the former BJP president.
"In the interest of our country and value-based democracy, everyone needs to find a transparent way (of financing parties). Because without funds, parties can't undertake any activity," asserted the minister.
The Supreme Court, in a landmark judgment last month, annulled the electoral bonds scheme ahead of the April-May Lok Sabha polls.
The top court said the scheme violates the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression as well as the right to information.
Since then, the State Bank of India (SBI) has released different sets of data pertaining to the electoral bonds, containing details about funds received by political parties under the scheme, to the Election Commission.
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.
Allahabad HC sets aside maintenance order in favour of earning wife, says she didn't tell truth
Prayagraj (PTI): The Allahabad High Court has set aside a lower court order mandating a man to pay maintenance to his estranged wife, observing that she earns her living and did not reveal the true salary in her affidavit.
Justice Madan Pal Singh also allowed a criminal revision petition filed by the man, Ankit Saha.
"A perusal of the impugned judgment indicates that in the affidavit filed before the trial court, the opposite party herself admitted that she is a post-graduate and a web designer by qualification. She is working as a senior sales coordinator in a company and getting a salary of Rs 34,000 per month," the court said in the December 3 order.
"But in her cross-examination, she has admitted that she was earning Rs 36,000 per month. Such an amount for a wife who has no other liability cannot be said to be meagre; whereas the man has the responsibility of maintaining his aged parents and other social obligations," it observed.
The high court observed that the woman was not entitled to get any maintenance from her husband "as she is an earning lady and able to maintain herself".
The man's counsel argued in court that the estranged wife did not reveal the whole truth in the affidavit.
"She claimed herself to be an illiterate and unemployed woman. When the document filed by the man was shown to her before the trial court, she admitted her income during cross-examination. Thus, it is clear that she did not come before the trial court with clean hands," the counsel submitted.
The court, in its order, said, "Cases of those litigants who have no regard for the truth and those who indulge in suppressing material facts need to be thrown out of the court."
It impugned the lower court's February 17 judgment and order, passed by the principal judge of a family court in Gautam Buddh Nagar and allowed the criminal revision petition filed by the man.
