Electoral Finance · Supreme Court Disclosure · 2018–2024

The Money Trail

₹16,518 Crore in Political Donations. Anonymous by Design. Struck Down as Unconstitutional.

Source: SBI / ECI disclosure, March 2024 · ADR India analysis Scheme ran: March 2018 – February 2024 Supreme Court verdict: 15 February 2024
₹16,518 cr
Total Bonds Sold
₹6,060 cr
BJP Received
₹1,609 cr
TMC Received
23
Parties Funded
6
Years Active
⚖ Struck down as unconstitutional — Supreme Court, 15 Feb 2024

What Electoral Bonds Were

Electoral bonds were promissory notes issued by the State Bank of India that any Indian citizen or company could buy and donate anonymously to a political party. The donor's name was never disclosed publicly — only the government, through the Finance Ministry, could identify who gave what, to whom.

The scheme was introduced via the Finance Act 2017 and operationalised in March 2018. In February 2024, a five-judge Supreme Court Constitution Bench unanimously struck it down, ruling that anonymous corporate funding violated voters' right to information and enabled quid pro quo corruption. By then, ₹16,518 crore had already flowed through the scheme.

1
Buy from SBI
Any Indian entity — individual or company — could buy bonds in denominations of ₹1,000 to ₹1 crore from designated SBI branches during 30-day windows four times a year.
2
Donate anonymously
The bond bore no donor name. It could be donated to any registered political party with at least 1% vote share. The donor's identity was permanently hidden from the public and from the party.
3
Party encashes
The party received the bond and encashed it via its designated SBI account within 15 days. The cash arrived with no disclosure obligation to the Election Commission under the scheme's original rules.
4
Only govt knew
SBI retained purchase records. The Finance Ministry — part of the ruling central government — could theoretically identify any donor at any time, creating a structural information asymmetry between the ruling party and opponents.
5
Court orders disclosure
In February 2024, the Supreme Court ruled the scheme unconstitutional and ordered SBI to hand all bond data to the ECI. The ECI published the data on its website in March 2024.
6
Pattern emerges
Analysis of the disclosed data by ADR India and investigative journalists showed a clear pattern: companies facing regulatory action or seeking government contracts were disproportionately large donors.

Who Received How Much

Of ₹16,518 crore in total bonds sold, BJP received 36.6% — more than the next three parties combined. TMC was the second-largest recipient nationally, receiving ₹1,609 crore (9.7% of the total). The data below shows all parties that received over ₹100 crore.

📌 Bengal Context

TMC's ₹1,609 crore represents donations from companies primarily in Bengal and Eastern India — energy, construction, food processing, and lottery sectors. As the state's ruling party for 14 years, TMC controlled state-level contracts, regulatory approvals, land allocation, and police oversight — all levers that create incentive for corporate political donation.


Donor → Party Flow Map

Flow width is proportional to the donation amount. Donor–party links are derived from the SBI/ECI disclosure and ADR India's analysis of redemption records.


Who Was Buying

The ten largest bond purchasers nationally accounted for over ₹5,000 crore — nearly a third of the entire scheme's value. Several donors were companies operating in heavily regulated sectors or under active government investigation at the time of donation.

# Donor Industry Total Donated Primary Recipients Note

What Flowed to TMC

Of TMC's ₹1,609 crore in total receipts, a significant portion came from Bengal-based or Bengal-active companies in sectors where the state government had regulatory or contractual leverage. The following are the largest documented donors to TMC based on the SBI/ECI disclosure.

⚠ The Pattern

Analysis by ADR India and investigative journalists identified a consistent pattern across the scheme: companies facing ED or CBI investigations made large donations, and in several documented cases, investigations were subsequently dropped, stayed, or paused. This does not establish legal quid pro quo — but the Supreme Court found the anonymity structure enabled exactly this possibility, which is why it declared the scheme unconstitutional.


Donors Under Scrutiny

The following cases were documented by investigative journalists and parliamentary opposition parties as examples of the pattern. They represent correlation, not proven legal exchange — but each warrants scrutiny given the scheme's anonymous design.


From Scheme to Disclosure


Data Sources & Methodology

Primary source: SBI submitted bond purchase and redemption data to the Election Commission of India under Supreme Court order. ECI published the data on its website on 14–15 March 2024.

Analysis: ADR India (Association for Democratic Reforms) published a detailed party-wise and donor-wise breakdown. Investigative reporting by The Hindu, Indian Express, The Wire, and Hindustan Times cross-referenced donors with company registrations, income tax filings, and regulatory records.

Caveats: The donor data has some gaps — approximately ₹1,500 crore in bonds were issued where SBI's data submission was incomplete. A few large donors appear under holding company names, making sector classification imprecise. All figures are from the official ECI-published dataset; discrepancies with internal party disclosures are noted in source reporting.

Correlation vs. causation: This page identifies patterns between donations and regulatory outcomes. These are documented correlations reported by credible investigative outlets. No legal finding of quid pro quo has been made by any court in these cases, except where explicitly noted.

Get updates when new data is published Subscribe to The Bengal Reader