Freebies in Electoral Democracy and Welfare State
Case Name - Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v Union of India
Status - Pending
Key Issue
The Supreme Court is hearing challenges against the practice of offering and distributing freebies during election campaigns. The Court's decision will determine how political parties contest elections in India.
1. Does promising freebies amount to bribing voters?
2. Are all freebies wasteful, or can some be considered social welfare schemes?
3. What kind of election promises amount to inefficient utilisation of public funds?
4.Who decides whether a party is using funds for a ‘public purpose’?
Summary
The case Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v Union of India deals with two key issues regarding religious and minority rights:
Challenge to the Places of Worship Act, 1991: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, a lawyer and politician, filed a petition challenging Sections 2, 3, and 4 of this Act. These sections prevent changing the religious character of places of worship from what it was on August 15, 1947, and prohibit courts from intervening in related disputes. The petitioner argues that these provisions violate constitutional guarantees like equality (Articles 14 and 15) and religious freedom (Articles 25 and 26), and that the Act unfairly freezes historical wrongs, preventing certain religious communities from reclaiming their religious sites.
Minority Status Case: Upadhyay also filed a petition challenging the constitutionality of Sections 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992, and 2(f) of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004. He argues that minority status should be determined based on state populations rather than national figures. The current system disadvantages communities like Hindus in states where they are a minority but do not receive the benefits granted to officially recognized minority communities. This issue revolves around whether the national approach violates constitutional principles like equality and the right to establish educational institutions for minorities.
Both cases are still pending in the Supreme Court, and their outcomes could significantly impact India's approach to religious sites and minority rights.
Comments