The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed serious concerns regarding the increasing practice of State Governments announcing so-called “freebies” in the run-up to elections, warning that such measures could have detrimental long-term effects on the country’s economy. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul Pancholi, questioned how long such election-time benefit schemes would continue.
The remarks were made while hearing a writ petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Company Ltd, which challenged Rule 23 of the Electricity Amendment Rules, 2024.
Supreme Court Questions Sustainability of Free Schemes
During the proceedings, the bench highlighted that indiscriminate distribution of state-sponsored benefits, without distinguishing between those in genuine need and those who can afford services, amounted to vote-bank appeasement. The judges noted that such practices could undermine sustainable economic growth.
Also read : French President Emmanuel Macron Concludes Mumbai Visit, Heads to Delhi for AI Impact Summit
Referring to recent state elections, the Supreme Court observed that last-minute welfare announcements may discourage citizens from actively participating in the workforce.
Economic Development at Risk
Supreme Court Chief Justice Surya Kant remarked, “The economic development of the nation will be hampered with this kind of largesse distribution. While it is the State’s duty to provide, there must be scrutiny over who actually benefits from these freebies.” He also pointed out the fiscal stress on states, saying, “States are running deficits yet still distributing freebies. Why can’t even 25% of annual revenue be allocated for developmental purposes?”
Issue Spans Across States
The bench clarified that these concerns are not limited to any one state but apply nationally. Justice Joymalya Bagchi emphasized the importance of structured financial planning, stating, “This is about all states. Expenditure should be planned. Budget proposals should justify how funds are allocated, for example, for addressing unemployment.”
Although the case involved the Electricity Amendment Rules, the Supreme Court ’s observations have reignited the debate on the sustainability and fairness of election-time welfare promises in India