Adani Group
Facts as of
Business and political funding
How companies may fund Indian parties, the 2017-24 electoral bond scheme struck down by the Supreme Court in February 2024, the data released afterwards, and the contested allegations and responses.
A dossier is a fact file. It records what is on record and who said what; it does not give a verdict. It is not scored and earns or loses no party points. How dossiers are written.
In depth
Company donations to parties have been governed by Section 182 of the Companies Act. In 2017 the Finance Act removed the cap of 7.5% of average net profit and the requirement to name recipient parties in company accounts [1]. The same year’s Budget introduced electoral bonds, bearer instruments sold by the State Bank of India whose buyers were not publicly named; the scheme was notified on 2 January 2018 [1].
On 15 February 2024 a five-judge Supreme Court bench held the scheme, the Section 182 change and related amendments unconstitutional, and directed SBI to give the Election Commission the purchase and encashment details [1][2]. The data, published in March 2024, listed purchasers and encashing parties separately, so a purchase cannot be matched to a recipient [3]. Encashments of Rs 12,769 crore were reported, with BJP, AITC and INC the three largest recipients [6]. Electoral trusts, which remain a legal channel, passed on about Rs 1,218 crore in FY 2023-24 [8].
Allegations of quid pro quo were put to the Supreme Court, which dismissed the petitions on 2 August 2024 as premature without ruling on the facts [4][12]. A separate private complaint in Bengaluru led to an FIR that the Karnataka High Court stayed and, in December 2024, quashed against one accused [10][11]. Parties differ: the Congress calls the scheme a channel for bribes, while the Prime Minister has said no system is perfect [9]. This page reports figures and statuses; it draws no conclusion about motives or effects.
Timeline
In date order. Each item shows what kind of statement it is, who is the actor, and where it comes from.
- EventReserve Bank of India
The Reserve Bank of India is reported to have expressed serious concerns about illicit finance and lack of transparency in the proposed bonds.
Source [1]: Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened) - EventGovernment of India (centre-2014-modi-1)
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley announces the electoral bond proposal in the Union Budget 2017-18; the Finance Act 2017 (a Money Bill) removes the 7.5% of average net profit cap on company donations in the Companies Act 2013 and amends other laws.
Source [1]: Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened) - EventDepartment of Economic Affairs
The Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018 is notified in the Gazette by the Department of Economic Affairs.
Source [1]: Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened) - FindingSupreme Court of India
A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by CJI D. Y. Chandrachud decides Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2024 INSC 113) and holds the scheme and related amendments unconstitutional.
Source [2]: Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 113, judgment of 15 February 2024 (official PDF, opened) - EventElection Commission of India
The Election Commission publishes the SBI data on bonds bought and encashed; party-wise encashment totals are reported from it.
Source [6]: Electoral bonds: BJP received Rs 6,060 crore, BRS with Rs 1,214.7 crore tops in South (opened) - FindingSupreme Court of India
The Supreme Court dismisses petitions seeking a court-monitored SIT into alleged quid pro quo through the bonds, calling the request premature because ordinary criminal remedies had not been invoked.
Source [12]: Common Cause v. Union of India (W.P.(C) 266/2024 and connected petitions), order of 2 August 2024 (official PDF, opened) - EventSpecial Court for People's Representatives, Bengaluru; Karnataka High Court
A Bengaluru special court ordered, on a private complaint, that an FIR be registered on alleged extortion linked to the bonds; the FIR was registered and the Karnataka High Court stayed the probe on 30 September 2024.
Source [10]: Electoral bonds: Bengaluru special court orders FIR against Nirmala Sitharaman for extortion (seen in search results, not opened) - FindingKarnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court quashes that FIR as against BJP leader Nalin Kumar Kateel; reports differ on whether the order covers other accused.
Source [11]: Karnataka High Court quashes electoral bonds extortion FIR against BJP leader Nalin Kumar Kateel (seen in search results, not opened)
Claims
Findings, official statements, data and events are on record. An allegation is a claim that no finding has established; it is marked with a dashed border, a warning triangle and the words "Not established", and always shows its status and any response.
| Claim | Type | Made by | Status | Response | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The electoral bond scheme, the removal of the proviso limiting company donations under Section 182 of the Companies Act, and related amendments to the Representation of the People Act and Income Tax Act were unconstitutional; anonymity violated voters' right to information under Article 19(1)(a), and unlimited company donations were arbitrary under Article 14. | Finding | Supreme Court Constitution Bench (CJI D. Y. Chandrachud), 15 February 2024 | Decided on 15 February 2024 (conclusions at para 216, directions at para 219 of the official judgment, opened) | Government and party reactions are in the positions section. | [2]: Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 113, judgment of 15 February 2024 (official PDF, opened) |
| Not established by a findingCompanies bought electoral bonds in exchange for favours such as contracts, licences, relief from agency investigations or policy changes (quid pro quo); petitioners named IFB Agro, Megha Engineering and Future Gaming in court and said some pharmaceutical donors had investigations dropped. | Allegation | Common Cause and Centre for Public Interest Litigation (counsel Prashant Bhushan); other petitioners Khem Singh Bhatti, Sudip Narayan Tamankar, Jai Prakash Sharma | Four petitions dismissed on 2 August 2024: the Court called the SIT request premature (normal remedies not yet invoked), described the premises as assumptions that would need a roving enquiry, and did not rule on the facts (order paras 12-21, opened) | The cited report records no response from the government, agencies or named companies; none was located in this research. | [4]: Supreme Court dismisses pleas for SIT investigation into electoral bonds quid pro quo (opened) [12]: Common Cause v. Union of India (W.P.(C) 266/2024 and connected petitions), order of 2 August 2024 (official PDF, opened) |
| Not established by a findingFinance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, BJP leaders and Enforcement Directorate officials committed extortion through the bonds, benefiting by over Rs 8,000 crore. | Allegation | Adarsh R. Iyer, Janaadhikaara Sangharsha Parishath (private complaint) | FIR registered 28 September 2024; probe stayed by the Karnataka High Court on 30 September 2024 (complainant's standing questioned); FIR quashed against Nalin Kumar Kateel on 3 December 2024; reports differ on the other accused; later status not checked | No response from Ms Sitharaman or the BJP was located in this research. | [11]: Karnataka High Court quashes electoral bonds extortion FIR against BJP leader Nalin Kumar Kateel (seen in search results, not opened) |
| Not established by a findingFuture Gaming bought Rs 100 crore of bonds seven days after an Enforcement Directorate raid; other large buyers such as Megha Engineering and Vedanta also faced probes during the period. | Allegation | Unnamed critics, as cited in the Wikipedia article on electoral bonds; the purchase and raid dates are reported facts, the inference of a link is the critics' claim | Timing as reported; no court or agency finding of a link located. A purchase that follows a raid does not by itself show that one caused the other | Responses of Future Gaming, Megha Engineering and Vedanta were not located in this research. | [1]: Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened) |
| Not established by a findingQwik Supply Chain, a large bond buyer, is a Reliance subsidiary. | Allegation | Media reports (as summarised on Wikipedia) | Unverified here | Reliance denied it, according to the same page. | [1]: Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened) |
| Not established by a findingThe BJP used electoral bonds as a channel for bribes and commissions. | Allegation | Rahul Gandhi (INC), 15 February 2024; Mallikarjun Kharge (INC) called the scheme black money conversion | No court or agency finding; the Supreme Court in August 2024 declined to order an investigation | Prime Minister Narendra Modi said in a 31 March 2024 television interview that no system is perfect and shortcomings can be fixed, and that those celebrating would repent, as paraphrased in search results; no BJP statement on the verdict itself was located. | [9]: Congress slams PM Modi over his remarks on electoral bonds issue (seen in search results, not opened) |
| Bond-sale totals: Rs 12,008 crore sold in 25 phases (March 2018 to March 2023) and Rs 4,509 crore in five phases (April 2023 to January 2024). | Data | Compiled by The News Minute from RTI replies obtained by Commodore Lokesh Batra | Secondary compilation of SBI/RTI data | Not applicable | [5]: Electoral Bonds: How much did political parties make? (opened) |
What the claim types mean
- Finding
- A court, regulator or statutory body's recorded finding or order. The order or judgment is cited.
- Official statement
- What a government, ministry, constitutional body or company officially said or filed.
- Allegation
- A claim by a party, petitioner, journalist, NGO or analyst that has not been established by a finding. Its current status and the named party’s response are always stated.
- Data
- A measured figure from an official or audited source, with its period and unit.
- Event
- A dated, uncontested occurrence, such as a notification issued, a bill passed or an arrest made.
Positions
Who says what, paraphrased with attribution. Every holder gets a card of the same size and the same fields.
Arun Jaitley (Finance Minister, 2017)
Donor anonymity was necessary because donors required to disclose identities would revert to cash; the scheme was presented as a way to bring funding into the banking system.
Source [1]: Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened)Reserve Bank of India (January 2017)
Raised serious concerns about illicit finance, lack of transparency and possible exploitation.
Source [1]: Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened)Election Commission of India
Raised concerns about electoral transparency when the bonds were announced and later changed its stance to support them, according to the Wikipedia summary.
Source [1]: Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened)Indian National Congress
Said in 2019 it would scrap the bonds if it came to power; on 15 February 2024 Jairam Ramesh welcomed the verdict as reinforcing the power of votes over notes. Congress also received bonds worth Rs 1,421.8 crore in the ECI data.
Source [9]: Congress slams PM Modi over his remarks on electoral bonds issue (seen in search results, not opened)Bharatiya Janata Party and the Union government
Modi said on 31 March 2024 that no system is perfect and gaps can be fixed (paraphrase from search results). BJP was the largest recipient in the ECI data (Rs 6,060.5 crore). A formal BJP statement on the verdict was not located.
Source [9]: Congress slams PM Modi over his remarks on electoral bonds issue (seen in search results, not opened)Communist Party of India (Marxist)
Opposed the scheme and accepted no bonds; the only mainstream party reported to have refused them.
Source [1]: Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened)AITC, BRS, BJD, DMK, YSRCP, TDP and other recipients
Their stated positions on the scheme and verdict were not located in this research; recipient amounts are in the tables.
Source [6]: Electoral bonds: BJP received Rs 6,060 crore, BRS with Rs 1,214.7 crore tops in South (opened)Supreme Court of India (August 2024)
Declined to order an SIT because ordinary remedies such as an FIR or complaint under the Prevention of Corruption Act had not been invoked; declined to order recovery of donations or reopening of tax assessments.
Source [4]: Supreme Court dismisses pleas for SIT investigation into electoral bonds quid pro quo (opened)
Data tables
| Date | Instrument | Change | Later court treatment |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | Finance Act 2017 / Companies Act 2013 s.182 | Removed the cap of 7.5% of average net profit of the previous three years on company donations to parties and the requirement to disclose recipient parties in profit and loss accounts | Deletion of the proviso held arbitrary under Article 14 (15 Feb 2024) |
| 2017 | Finance Act 2017 (other) | Cap of Rs 2,000 on cash donations to a party; Income Tax and RBI Acts amended to permit bonds; FCRA amended to broaden the definition of a foreign entity (exact year not verified) | Bond-related amendments struck down; FCRA change not addressed in the sources |
| 2018-01-02 | Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018 | Bearer bonds sold by SBI, donor identity not disclosed to the public | Held to violate Article 19(1)(a); unsold bonds to be returned |
| 2024-02-15 | Supreme Court judgment (2024 INSC 113) | SBI to give donor and recipient details to the ECI, ECI to publish | Data published 14-15 March 2024 |
| Party | Rs crore | Share of total encashed (%) |
|---|---|---|
| BJP | 6060.5 | 47.5 |
| All India Trinamool Congress | 1609.5 | 12.6 |
| Indian National Congress | 1421.8 | 11.1 |
| Bharat Rashtra Samithi | 1214.7 | 9.5 |
| Biju Janata Dal | 775.5 | 6.1 |
| DMK | 639 | 5 |
| YSR Congress | 337 | 2.6 |
| Telugu Desam Party | 218.8 | 1.7 |
| JD(S) | 43.5 | 0.3 |
| Jana Sena Party | 21 | 0.2 |
| AIADMK | 6 | 0.05 |
| CPI(M) | 0 | 0 |
| Party | Rs crore |
|---|---|
| BJP (54% as reported) | 6570 |
| Indian National Congress (9% as reported) | 1123 |
| All India Trinamool Congress | 1092 |
| TRS / BRS | 912 |
| Biju Janata Dal | 774 |
| DMK | 616 |
| YSR Congress | 381 |
| Telugu Desam Party | 146 |
| Aam Aadmi Party | 84 |
| Purchaser (as listed) | Rs crore |
|---|---|
| Future Gaming and Hotel Services | 1368 |
| Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Ltd | 966 |
| Qwik Supply Chain Pvt Ltd | 410 |
| Vedanta Ltd | 400 |
| Haldia Energy Ltd | 377 |
| Bharati Group | 247 |
| Essel Mining and Industries Ltd | 224 |
| Western UP Power Transmission | 220 |
| Keventer Foodpark Infra Ltd | 194 |
| Madanlal Ltd | 185 |
| DLF Group | 170 |
| Yashoda Super Speciality Hospital | 162 |
| Recipient | Prudent | Triumph | Einzigartig | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BJP | 723 | 127 | 0.17 | - |
| Indian National Congress | about 150 | - | - | - |
| YSR Congress | 72 | - | - | - |
| Telugu Desam Party | 33 | - | - | - |
| Jana Sena Party | 5 | - | - | - |
| Period | BJP | INC | All national parties / note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2004-05 to 2011-12 | - | - | Business houses gave Rs 378.89 crore to national parties, 87% of known-source contributions |
| 2012-13 to 2015-16 | 92% of its voluntary contributions above Rs 20,000 from corporates | 85% of the same | ADR percentages of each party's own receipts |
| 2016-17 and 2017-18 | Rs 915.59 crore from 1,731 corporate donors | Rs 55.36 crore from 151 corporate donors | Reported as BJP 94% and INC 81% of own voluntary contributions |
| 2022-23 | Rs 610.49 crore from 3,067 business houses | Rs 55.62 crore from 70 business enterprises | Five national parties together Rs 680.49 crore |
What these facts do not show
- Donation, bond-purchase and trust data alone cannot establish any link between a donation and a policy, contract, licence, regulatory decision or investigation; the published data did not match purchasers to recipient parties, and timing correlations are not findings.
- The Supreme Court judgment struck the scheme down on constitutional grounds (transparency, arbitrariness); it did not find that any named company or party gave or received anything in exchange, and the August 2024 order declined to order an investigation without ruling on the facts.
- The tables use different periods and bases (encashed, sold, received, declared above Rs 20,000); they cannot be combined into one total of party funding, and cash or other non-disclosed funding is not captured.
- Year-by-year party corporate-donation series for 2004 to 2024, the positions of most recipient parties other than BJP, INC and CPI(M), the exact earlier legal history, and the status of the Bengaluru FIR after December 2024 were not established.
Sources
Numbers in square brackets refer to this list. Types: primary, official data and court sources are weighed above media and academic ones.
- Electoral bonds (Wikipedia, opened)WikipediaMedia
- Electoral Bonds: How much did political parties make? (opened)The News MinuteMedia
- BJP garnered 90% of corporate donations received by national parties (ADR) (seen in search results, not opened)Association for Democratic ReformsMedia
- Congress slams PM Modi over his remarks on electoral bonds issue (seen in search results, not opened)The South First (PTI)Media
Facts as of . Last reviewed .Report an error.
Printed from https://indiareview.pages.dev/dossiers/business-and-political-funding/. Facts as of 12 Oct 2026; check the sources for later developments.