Blitz Bureau
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on August 2 declined to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a Special Investigative Team (SIT) probe under the supervision of a retired apex court judge into an alleged scam in poll financing using electoral bonds.
During the hearing, the bench presided over by CJI DY Chandrachud observed that the ordinary course of law may remedy the allegations raised in the petition, and asked advocate Prashant Bhushan to explain as to why the top court should interfere in the matter.
Prashant Bhushan replied, “Nothing will come out in an ordinary FIR unless investigated under the supervision of a retired SC judge. There is an apparent quid pro quo. This is one of the worst kinds of financial corruption this country has witnessed.”
Bhushan said the majority of electoral bonds appeared to have been given quid pro quo, adding that not only “political parties and very very influential corporates”, but some of the “premier investigating agencies also appear to be involved”. He submitted that the SC judgment striking down the electoral bonds scheme itself had apprehended such quid pro quo.
