Hyderabad: All political parties contend that the provisions of the RP Act clearly draw a distinction between an individual candidate put up by a political party and the political party itself.
The Act prohibits an individual candidate from making promises, which constitutes a corrupt practice within the meaning of Section 123 of the RP Act. It places no fetters on the part of parties to make promises in the manifesto.
According to Supreme Court senior counsel Arvind P. Datar, promises of free distribution of non-essential commodities amounts to electoral bribe under Section 123 of the RP Act. The Comptroller and Auditor General has a duty to examine expenditures even before they are deployed; and safeguards must be built into schemes to ensure that the distribution is made for a public purpose and is not misused.
The state raises funds through taxation which can be used only to discharge its constitutional functions. Taxpayers’ contribution cannot be used to fund largesse.
According to Mr P.V. Krishnaiah, who had filed a case against the Telangana state government for regularisation of services of contract / part-time lecturers working in government junior and degree colleges as a part of implementation of its poll promises, the Election Commission has power to regulate the manifestoes of political parties in view of the findings of the apex court in Subramaniam Balaji.
