Supreme Court Questions Freebie Culture, Flags Economic Concerns

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered strong observations on the growing culture of election-time “freebies,” remarking that it may be time to reassess such policies in light of their potential impact on the nation’s economic health.

The court’s comments came while hearing a plea filed by the Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO), which has proposed providing free electricity to all consumers, irrespective of their financial status. The power utility has challenged certain provisions of the Electricity Amendment Rules, 2024.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi questioned the broader implications of indiscriminate subsidy distribution, particularly ahead of elections.

“What kind of culture are we developing in India?” the Chief Justice observed during the proceedings. While acknowledging that targeted welfare measures for economically weaker sections are a legitimate function of the state, the Bench expressed concern over universal giveaways that fail to distinguish between those who can afford to pay and those who cannot.

The court underscored that most Indian states are already grappling with revenue deficits. In such circumstances, blanket subsidy schemes could further strain public finances and divert resources away from long-term development initiatives.

“Most of the states in the country are revenue-deficient states, and yet they are offering such freebies, overlooking development,” the Bench remarked, adding that sustained economic growth requires investment in infrastructure and employment generation rather than widespread largesse.

The Chief Justice further questioned whether policies that provide free food, bicycles, electricity, and other benefits to all citizens—without financial criteria—could adversely affect work culture and productivity. “The states should work to open avenues for employment,” the Bench observed, cautioning against a model of governance overly reliant on universal giveaways.

Following the hearing, the Supreme Court issued notices to the Centre and other respondents in the matter.

The case has once again brought the contentious debate over election-time subsidies and fiscal responsibility to the forefront, with the apex court signalling the need for a balanced approach between welfare commitments and sustainable economic governance.