Supreme Court Orders SBI to Fully Disclose Electoral Bond Details by March 21, Emphasizes Non-Selective Disclosure

New Delhi- The State Bank of India (SBI) can't be selective in disclosing information linked to electoral bonds, the Supreme Court of India said on Monday, directing the bank to submit full details of the bonds' numbers to the Election Commission by March 21. 

The SBI has been asked to disclose all the details of the electoral bonds it has sold. This includes the unique numbers of the bonds, which are essential for knowing who bought them and who received the money.

The Supreme Court has also asked the bank to submit a sworn declaration to that effect by March 21.

This order was made by a five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud after the Supreme Court had earlier asked the SBI to disclose the bond details. In its previous verdict, the Supreme Court had said that the SBI is legally bound to disclose the information about the electoral bonds. The Supreme Court had earlier asked the Election Commission to disclose the identities of donors, the amounts donated, and the recipients by March 13. Two lists have been disclosed by SBI so far in compliance with the SC order.

During the hearing, the bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and including Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, J B Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, reiterated that they had instructed the State Bank of India (SBI) to reveal all details about electoral bonds, including their unique numbers.

"We had asked SBI to disclose all details including the bond numbers," the bench stated orally.

"There is no doubt that SBI was required to disclose all details. This includes the alphanumeric number and the serial number, if any, of the bonds redeemed," the bench added.

Senior advocate Harish Salve, representing SBI, assured the court that if the numbers of Electoral Bonds needed to be provided, the bank would comply.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, argued that the main goal was to combat black money, and the court should be aware of how its judgment was being implemented outside the courtroom.

"The court must know how its judgment is being played out. Now, there's another level of witch-hunting, not at the central government level. People appearing before the court are giving press interviews and deliberately embarrassing the court. There's a series of social media posts, at least intended to cause embarrassment," said the Solicitor General.

The SG requested the Supreme Court to consider issuing directions regarding this matter.

In response, CJI DY Chandrachud stated, " “As judges, we are only on the rule of law and work as per the Constitution. Our court is only to work for the governance of the rule of law in this polity. As judges, we are also discussed in social media but our shoulders are broad enough to take this. We are only enforcing our directions of the judgment."