‘Paramount importance’: Supreme Court on pleas challenging ‘freebie culture’, 3-judge bench to hear them

The petitions seek to revisit the 2013 verdict in S. Subramaniam Balaji v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others.

2 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Feb 5, 2026 05:38 PM IST

Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay drew the Supreme Court’s attention to a petition he had filed challenging the freebie culture (File photo).

The Supreme Court Thursday termed petitions challenging political parties distributing freebies in the run-up to elections as of “paramount importance” and said a three-judge bench will hear them.

“It is of paramount importance and is in public interest…this has to be heard by a three-judge bench,” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant presiding over a two-judge bench said.

He said this as Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay drew the court’s attention to a petition he had filed challenging the freebie culture and urged the court to take up the matter without further delay.

The counsel pointed out, “Five Assembly elections are coming” and “only sun and moon are left to be promised.” He added that “these (freebies) are corrupt practices”.

“Wait for March,” said the CJI, indicating that it may take it up then.
The plea challenges the Supreme Court’s 2013 judgment in the case of S Subramaniam Balaji v State of Tamil Nadu and Others.

In the 2006 Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) promised free colour television sets to all households without them if it was elected to power. The DMK won the polls, and the budget allocated Rs 750 crore to implement the promise.

In the 2011 Assembly polls, the ruling DMK announced more freebies. Opposition AIADMK-led alliance too announced free grinders, mixies, electric fans, laptop computers, 4 gm gold, thalis (mangal sutra), Rs. 50,000 cash for women’s marriage, green houses, 20 kg rice to all ration card holders, even to those above the poverty line and free cattle and sheep, if it won. The AIADMK won the polls and took steps to implement the promise.

Story continues below this ad

Subramanian Balaji challenged these schemes in Supreme Court, which ultimately dismissed the petitions in 2013. The court held that promises made in an election manifesto do not constitute “corrupt practices” under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

A clutch of petitions was filed in the Supreme Court challenging the Subramaniam Balaji v. State of Tamil Nadu judgment. On August 26, 2022, a three-judge bench headed by the then Chief Justice of India referred the petitions to another three-judge bench.
—-