Shimla/NewDelhi: The release of Electoral Bonds data by the State Bank of India after Supreme Court order has sparjed a fierce political battle between India's opposition Congress party and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Amidst escalating scrutiny over electoral bonds, revelations have surfaced regarding the involvement of top donors facing enforcement directorate (ED) and income tax (IT) probes.
Reports circulating widely on social media have highlighted the precarious situation of significant contributors to electoral bonds, with a focus on five prominent entities.
Among them, Future Gaming Mega Engineering, a lottery company, and Vedanta Realtors, a mining tycoon, stand out.
Future Gaming and Hotels Private Limited, spearheaded by South Martin, emerged as the foremost purchaser of electoral bonds, tallying a staggering amount of ₹1300 crore between 2019 and 2024.
The company has been under the radar of the ED since 2019, with assets amounting to ₹650 crore attached by the authorities within a span of three years.
Strikingly, just five days subsequent to the asset attachment, the company purportedly acquired ₹100 crore worth of bonds. In a separate development, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed charges against Future Gaming for alleged violations of the Lottery Regulation Act of 1998, allegedly swindling the Sikkim government.
Following closely in electoral bond expenditures is Hyderabad-based Mega Engineering and Infrastructures Limited, led by Krishna Reddy.
The company, involved in major infrastructure projects including dams and the Zozila Pass tunnel connecting Jammu and Kashmir to Ladakh, procured bonds worth ₹1000 crore from 2019 to 2024.
Similarly, the Vedanta Group, headed by industrialist Anil Agarwal, made acquisitions worth ₹370 crore in electoral bonds during the same period.
The group, embroiled in controversies ranging from a visa racket to dealings with certain Chinese nationals, has faced intense scrutiny from the ED.
This expose on electoral bonds has sent shockwaves through political circles, with analysts dissecting its potential ramifications on the electoral landscape.
The use of ED and IT raids for potential electoral advantage has sparked concerns about the integrity of the democratic process in India.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh wasted no time in dissecting the data, revealing what he alleges to be corruption tactics employed by the BJP.
According to Ramesh's analysis, over 1,300 companies and individuals have donated more than 6,000 crores to the BJP since 2019 through Electoral Bonds.
He pointed out several instances of what he perceives as quid pro quo arrangements, kickbacks, and money laundering through shell companies. Ramesh highlighted cases where companies made significant donations and then seemingly received lucrative government contracts or were spared from investigations by enforcement agencies.
In response, BJP supporters took to social media to counter Ramesh's claims.
They reminded the public that during Congress's tenure, the party raised a substantial amount through Electoral Bonds as well, totaling 1,662 crores. They questioned Congress's transparency, pointing out that the party did not disclose its list of contributors to the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR).
The debate has raged on as netizens demanded transparency from both sides.
They challenged Congress to reveal the sources behind the 1,700 crores it received through Electoral Bonds and questioned whether those donations were also tied to quid pro quo arrangements.
The controversy deepened with accusations and counter-accusations flying between the two political factions. Congress supporters alleged cozy relationships between certain companies and the ruling party, while BJP defenders questioned the motives behind Congress's sudden scrutiny of Electoral Bonds.
As the political storm rages on, with each side hurling accusations at the other, the issue of Electoral Bonds has become a focal point in India's political discourse, with transparency, accountability, and allegations of corruption at the center of the debate.