In Haryana, revadi is a fairly common sweet, but these days, "free ki revadi" is more often used. In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), the supreme court was asked to rule that promising irrational freebies ahead of elections that would later be paid for with public funds improperly influences voters, disrupts the level playing field, undermines the foundation of a free and fair election, and also amounts to misuse of the public funds, which is comparable to bribery ahead of elections.
The supreme court has ordered an expert panel made up of representatives from the NITI Aayog, the Finance Commission, the Law Commission, the Reserve bank of India, members of the ruling party, and the opposition parties to come forward and make recommendations to address the issue of offering freebies during election campaigns. Only the unreasonable freebie provided with public money that sways elections would be scrutinised; no one could complain that the state was utilising cash for any social programme. An expert committee has been requested by the supreme court to make recommendations about everything that would be considered "irrational giveaways."
In light of these plans, the aforementioned committee would need to determine the influence it would have on the election results. A panel of experts must decide whether welfare programmes that offer benefits at no cost can likewise "unduly" influence voters or if only the illogical use of public cash can do so.
The supreme court has ordered an expert panel made up of representatives from the NITI Aayog, the Finance Commission, the Law Commission, the Reserve bank of India, members of the ruling party, and the opposition parties to come forward and make recommendations to address the issue of offering freebies during election campaigns. Only the unreasonable freebie provided with public money that sways elections would be scrutinised; no one could complain that the state was utilising cash for any social programme. An expert committee has been requested by the supreme court to make recommendations about everything that would be considered "irrational giveaways."
In light of these plans, the aforementioned committee would need to determine the influence it would have on the election results. A panel of experts must decide whether welfare programmes that offer benefits at no cost can likewise "unduly" influence voters or if only the illogical use of public cash can do so.
