Not against policy, but distinguish freebies and welfare: SC

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said it was not against a government policy or scheme but there has to be a distinction between freebies and welfare schemes.

A three-judge bench presided over by Chief Justice N V Ramana said some state gives cycles to poor and women and improved their lifestyle. "The problem is which is freebie and which can be said to be beneficial for the upliftment of a person. For a rural person struck by poverty, his livelihood may depend on that small boat or bicycle," the bench said.

The court was hearing a PIL by BJP leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay for regulating freebies.

"We are not against any government policy. We are not against any scheme. Tomorrow, if the Government of India makes a law that states should not make freebies...can we say that government can say whatever and we cannot look into it? In the interest of both welfare of people and the economy, we started looking into this issue. Now a debate has to take place and a committee has to be made," the bench said.

Read | Freebies are never 'free': RBI MPC member Ashima Goyal

The court pointed toward the complex nature of the issue as senior advocate Kapil Sibal contended that this issue needs to be dealt with through a system and not politically. He also suggested finance commission should be looped in the process.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that nobody had an issue with social welfare measures, but difficulty arises when a party distributed non-essentials such as sarees, television sets etc.

Mehta said the voter has a right to make an informed choice and false promises which the finances do not permit would entail disastrous economic consequences.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing the petitioner, clarified that his case was limited to promises made by political parties during elections. He claimed that political parties were hijacking the issue by calling it social welfare, however, in reality, it is fiscal discipline issue, which if not dealt would make India a Sri Lanka.

Senior advocate P Wilson, representing the DMK, sought to make submissions in the case but the Chief Justice told him," Mr Wilson, the party you represent, I have a lot of things to say but I am restraining myself…Don’t think you are the only wise party. The way you are talking, giving statements...Don't think we are ignoring all that is being said."

DMK has filed an impleading petition filed in the top court saying that welfare measures intended to uplift the marginalised persons cannot be termed as "freebies".