New Delhi: Can the Centre or Election Commission on India (ECI) regulate the activities of political parties and check their alleged misuse of conduits for black money and criminal activities?
The Supreme Court, on Friday, sought responses on this from the Union government and the ECI.
The bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a plea filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay and suggested that he also implead all recognised and registered political parties since any directions in the case would directly affect them.
In his Public Interest Litigation (PIL), Upadhyay has prayed to the court to direct the ECI to frame comprehensive rules governing registration and functioning of political parties and for the Union government to enact legislation to curb what it described as the “menace of corruption, casteism, communalism, criminalisation, and money laundering in politics”.
Relying on recent income tax raids, the petition, filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey, highlights how little-known political outfits are allegedly being used as vehicles for laundering unaccounted wealth.
On July 13, 2025, raids on the Indian Social Party and Yuva Bharat Atma Nirbhar Dal reportedly unearthed black money worth ₹500 crore, with the entities accused of accepting cash donations through hawala channels and returning the money via cheque after deducting a 20% commission. The details, carried in newspapers, have been annexed to the petition. Similarly, an August 12, 2025 raid exposed another outfit, the National Sarva Samaj Party, where authorities allegedly seized ₹271 crore in unaccounted funds from office bearers’ residences.
The plea contends that such “shell parties” are floated solely to convert black money into white, adding that many office bearers have serious criminal antecedents, including charges of trafficking, extortion, kidnapping, rape, and contract killings, while enjoying police protection under the cover of politics.
“Nearly 90% of registered parties never contest elections and exist merely as conduits for illegal funds,” the petition claims, adding that bogus leaders flaunt SUVs with hooters, oversized nameplates, and live off illicit cash while projecting political legitimacy.
Upadhyay’s petition underscores that political parties wield extraordinary power under India’s constitutional framework, binding legislators under the Tenth Schedule, recommending disqualifications, and indirectly shaping the election of the President, Vice-President and chief ministers. Yet, unlike companies, cooperatives, or trusts, parties remain outside any comprehensive regulatory framework.
Currently, Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act (RPA) provides only for registration of parties, while Section 29C mandates disclosure of donations above ₹20,000. “There is no law to ensure internal democracy, transparent funding, or accountability,” states the plea, pointing out that despite being substantially financed by the State, political parties are not treated as “public authorities”.
Stressing the urgency of reforms, the PIL refers to comparative democracies where political parties are subject to statutory oversight, including mandatory internal democracy, term limits for leadership, transparent accounting, and penal consequences for violations. It argues that unchecked proliferation of unregulated parties undermines public trust, entrenches corruption, and corrodes democratic institutions.
“Despite holding decisive power in governance and lawmaking, political parties remain unaccountable. A robust legal framework is indispensable to preserve the integrity of Indian democracy,” the plea submits.
