Electoral bonds ‘extortion’ case: High Court halts probe

The Karnataka High Court has temporarily halted further investigation until October 22 in a case registered against Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and others for allegedly extorting money through electoral bonds. The decision was made in response to a quashing petition filed by former State BJP President Naleen Kumar Kateel, who is also an accused in the case.

The complaint, filed by Adarsh Iyer, alleged that government agencies like the Enforcement Directorate (ED) were used to intimidate companies and force them to purchase electoral bonds. Justice M Nagaprasanna, presiding over a single judge bench, stated, “Permitting investigation even prima facie, till the statement of objection is filed by the respondent, will be abuse of process of law. In that light, I deem it appropriate to interdict further investigation in the matter till the next date of hearing.”

The Court highlighted that the elements of extortion are defined in Section 383 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which requires that any informant approaching the court or police must be put under fear and deliver property to the accused for prima facie extortion to be established. It reasoned that criminal law can be initiated by anyone, but certain provisions in the IPC can only be invoked by the aggrieved party. In this case, the complainant is not the aggrieved party under Section 383 of the IPC.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate KG Raghavan, representing Kateel, argued that investing money in electoral bonds “can never be extortion in the eyes of law.” On the other hand, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the complainant, contended, “If they put the fear in the minds of companies that ED will raid and then they are forced to buy electoral bonds and then ED stops action, then this is a classic case of extortion.”