On January 12, The Election Commission of India reassured the Supreme Court that it had, time and again, adopted various measures to curb the menace of 'money power' in elections, such as the election expenditure monitoring mechanism in place since the 2010 Bihar Assembly elections, and "will continue to do so". The Supreme Court was informed that the central regulatory body, which was "seriously concerned" about the increasing poll spending by political parties, had already implemented a "robust mechanism" to keep election expenditure within the statutory limit prescribed by the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, and to keep a check on excess or unaccounted expenditure by political parties or their members.

“The Election Commission of India is seriously concerned about the increasing use of money power in elections. To curb this menace, the Election Commission of India has effectively and successively enforced the Election Expenditure Monitoring mechanism in the elections since the Genera' Elections to Bihar Legislative Assembly, 2010. In order to keep the election expenditure within the statutory limit prescribed under Rule 90 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 and also to curb excess expenditure/unaccounted expenditure, the Election Commission has introduced a robust mechanism for election expenditure monitoring during elections…The Election Commission has time and again adopted various measures to curb the menace of money power in elections and will continue to do so in future,” the affidavit states.

The petitioner prayed for an appropriate direction to the Election Commission to develop a comprehensive plan of action to curb excess election expenditures with stringent and effective provisions of action against erring candidates and political parties. Additionally, the top court was urged to compel the commission to 'earnestly' examine election expenditures to 'bring credibility and democratic reforms'. The commission has urged that the petition be dismissed as unmaintainable from the start, describing the prayers as "vague and half-baked" and questioning the petitioner's sincerity and public spiritedness. In particular, the regulatory body objected to the petitioner's request to the Supreme Court to order the development of a comprehensive plan of action to address the issue of growing money power in elections. “The petitioner has not taken into account that such a mechanism already exists,” the affidavit points out. It is further stated that a former chief election commissioner and the author of the foreword of a report on which the petitioner has placed heavily reliance, has acknowledged that the reason for more money being seized today is the 'increased vigilance and efforts' by the Election Commission of India.

Case Title: Prabhakar Deshpande v. The Chief Election Commissioner of India & Ors. 
Citation: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1290 of 2021