Supreme Court on Thursday expressed sharp disapproval regarding the burgeoning practice of state governments rollling out "freebies" as elections approach.
According to a report in LiveLaw, questioning the sustainability of this pattern, the bench noted that such tendencies could stymie the nation's long-term economic progress. The apex court emphasised that a failure to distinguish between the affluent and the needy when distributing state benefits transforms welfare into mere political gain, stating that indiscriminately doling out benefits "is nothing but appeasement, which is not conducive to the economic development of the country."
Questions on labour and national productivity
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi raised these points during a hearing involving the Tamil Nadu Power Distribution Company Ltd.
The CJI voiced specific scepticism regarding the impact of unconditional cash transfers on the national work ethic. Reflecting on the potential erosion of industriousness, the Supreme Court asked: "If direct cash transfer schemes are announced, will people work anymore?"
Dilution of the welfare state model
During the proceedings, CJI Kant interrogated the rationale behind states absorbing utility costs for all citizens regardless of their financial standing. While acknowledging the necessity of a safety net, he questioned the lack of targeting in current policies.
"What kind of culture are we developing? What is the distinction between persons who are capable of paying electricity bill and persons who are marginalised?" he asked.
Development versus immediate consumption
The apex court highlighted a worrying diversion of funds from essential infrastructure to temporary electoral incentives. CJI Kant said that even states with healthy finances have a duty to prioritise the collective future over momentary gratification.
He remarked: "We are sometimes really disturbed... Instead of that, you keep on distributing food, clothes, and people enjoy at the time of elections. What is happening in this country?"
A call for policy re-evaluation
The judiciary urged the political community to reconsider the current trajectory of governance warning that a "balance" must be struck to avoid national stagnation. The CJI stressed that while helping the vulnerable is a duty, subsidising the wealthy is a mistake.
The CJI argued that the state should empower individuals through employment rather than creating a cycle of dependency.
"We will be hampering the development of the nation if we keep on having this largesse distribution. There has to be a balance," he said.
The judicial critique arrives as major states preparing for 2026 elections accelerate their cash-transfer initiatives.
In Tamil Nadu, the government has frontloaded payments for the Kalaignar Magalir Urumai Thittam scheme, providing a total of Rs 5,000 to 1.3 crore women to cover the months leading up to the poll, with a promise to double future allowances. Not to be outdone, the opposition AIADMK has countered with its own pledge of Rs 2,000 per month for female heads of households.
In Assam, a "Bihu gift" combined with frontloaded monthly payments resulted in a one-time transfer of Rs 8,000 to millions of beneficiaries. Kerala has introduced the Sthree Suraksha scheme for monthly support while West Bengal recently utilised its budget to increase the monthly stipends provided under the Lakshmir Bhandar scheme for over two million women, ensuring that both general and SC/ST category recipients see a significant hike in direct assistance.
