Randeep Hooda and Lin Laishram had a beautiful traditional wedding on November 29. It was intimate and had close friends and family in the attendance. The cultural authenticity of the ceremony won over the internet.

In an interview with Times of India, Randeep Hooda spoke about the precise moment when he knew that Lin Laishram is the one for him. He shared, “It happened point by point. We started living together through COVID and that really brought us together. We had better understanding with each other. And then it happened very organically, we wanted to go to the next step, we wanted to have babies and grow our family. I have never been a very easy person to be around because I’m always demanding but when she comes around everything changes.” 

The two have been making several public appearances since then at events and screenings and they do make for a lovely couple.

In a historic judgment, the Supreme Court today struck down the electoral bonds scheme for political funding, holding that it violates the citizens’ right to information. The electoral bonds scheme, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said, was unconstitutional and arbitrary and may lead to a quid pro quo arrangement between political parties and donors.

The Constitution bench of five judges held that the stated objective of fighting black money and maintaining the confidentiality of donors cannot defend the scheme. Electoral bonds, the court said, are not the only way to curb black money.

The Chief Justice of India said State Bank of India shall stop issue of these bonds at once and provide details of donations made through this mode to the Election Commission of India. The poll body was asked to publish this information on its website by March 13.

The five-judge bench, also comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra, came up with a unanimous decision. “We have arrived at a unanimous decision. There are two opinions, one by myself and another by Justice Sanjiv Khanna. Both arrive at the same conclusion. There is a slight variance in the reasoning,” the Chief Justice of India said.

The electoral bonds scheme was introduced in 2018 with the stated objective of blocking black money from entering the political system. Then Finance Minister Arun Jaitley had then said the conventional practice of political funding in India was cash donations. “The sources are anonymous or pseudonymous. The quantum of money was never disclosed. The present system ensures unclean money coming from unidentifiable sources. It is a wholly non-transparent system,” he had then said. On the confidentiality clause, he had said the disclosure of the donors’ identity would make them go back to the cash option.

Soon after the scheme was implemented, multiple parties challenged it in court. These included CPM, Congress leader Jaya Thakur and non-profit Association for Democratic Reforms. They argued that the confidentiality clause came in the way of the citizen’s right to information.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for ADR, said the bonds promote corruption as they are opaque and anonymous. “The bonds do not allow a level-playing field between political parties which are ruling versus political parties which are in the Opposition or between political parties and independent candidates.” He also said ever since this scheme was introduced, contributions made through this donation method had exceeded all other modes.

In fact, the Election Commission, too, had opposed the scheme when it was brought, calling it a “retrograde step” with regard to transparency in political funding. Later

The government had gone all out to defend the scheme in the Supreme Court. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta had said it was a deliberate attempt to ensure that funding received by political parties was clean money. He had said disclosing the donor’s identity could disincentivise the whole process. “Suppose, as a contractor, I donate to the Congress Party. I do not want the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to know because it might form a government,” he had said. When the court asked how this confidentiality can be reconciled with the voters’ right to information, Mr Mehta had replied that voters do not vote on the basis of who is funding which party but on ideology, principles, leadership and efficiency of a party.

Countering the right to information argument, Attorney General of India R Ventakaramani had said there “can be no general right to know anything and everything without being subjected to reasonable restrictions”. “Secondly, the right to know as necessary for expression can be for specific ends or purposes and not otherwise,” he had said.

The Supreme Court also struck down the amendments made to company and tax laws to bring the scheme into effect. Earlier, companies needed to be at least three years old to donate and had to disclose the amount and name of the party to which it was donating. These conditions that ensured transparency in corporate donations were done away with under the new law.

“A company has graver influence on the political process than contributions by individuals. Contributions by companies are purely business transactions. Amendment to Section 182 Companies Act is manifestly arbitrary for treating companies and individuals alike,” the court said.

“Before the amendment, loss making companies were not able to contribute. The amendment does not recognise the harm of allowing loss-making companies to contribute due to quid pro quo. The amendment to Section 182 Companies Act is manifestly arbitrary for not making a distinction between loss making and profit making companies,” the court added.

Seven union ministers whose Rajya Sabha terms end in April have not been re-nominated by the ruling BJP, prompting speculation Prime Minister Narendra Modi‘s party may field them in the Lok Sabha election that is expected later the same month.

Among the big names absent are Health Minister Mansukh Mandaviya (Gujarat), Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan (Madhya Pradesh), and junior IT Minister Rajeev Chandrashekhar (Karnataka).

Also absent are Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav (Rajasthan), and Fisheries Minister Parshottam Rupala (Gujarat), as well as Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises Minister Narayan Rane and junior External Affairs Minister, both of whom represented Maharashtra.

Sources have told NDTV all seven could now be fielded from Lok Sabha constituencies in various states.

Sources indicate Mr Pradhan may be fielded from Sambalpur or Dheknal in his home state of Odisha, while Mr Yadav may run from Rajasthan’s Alwar or Mahendragarh, and Mr Chandrashekhar could contest one of the four seats in Bengaluru; three of these – Central, North, and South – are held by the BJP.

Similarly, Mr Mandaviya may run from Bhavnagar or Surat in Guajrat, while Mr Rupala may get Rajkot. Mr Muraleedharan, meanwhile, may be fielded from his home state of Kerala; the BJP has no presence there, and may look to high-profile names to revive its fortunes.

The BJP has retained only a few big names, in fact, only two union ministers from the Rajya Sabha have been retained – Railways Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw (Odisha) and junior Fisheries Minister L Murugan (Madhya Pradesh). No outgoing MP who has served two or more terms has been repeated.

READ | BJP Fields JP Nadda, Ashok Chavan For Rajya Sabha, Sena Names Milind Deora

The only exception is party boss JP Nadda. He though, has been shifted – from Himachal Pradesh, which the Congress won in 2022, to Gujarat. It has also found space for new entrants, including former Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan, who quit the Congress this week.

Overall, it is all change for the BJP, with only four of 28 outgoing Rajya Sabha MPs renominated. The remaining 24 have reportedly been asked for their preference of Lok Sabha seats.

The party has named 28 candidates to the 56 seats that will fall vacant in April, with the focus on new faces and emphasising – to its leadership structure and the voters – its determination to recognise grassroots workers, even those who not known to the  public, while also factoring in social equations.

A notable point is that three of the BJP’s new Rajya Sabha MPs – Dharmshila Gupta (Bihar), Medha Kulkarni (Maharashtra), and Maya Naroliya (Madhya Pradesh) – are associated with the women’s wing, in keeping with the PM’s emphasis on the higher approval the party enjoys among women voters.

The BJP’s strategy for the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha elections appears to mirror that for the five Assembly polls in November last year, when the party focused on “collective leadership” and selecting high-profile candidates – including fielding Lok Sabha MPs for state elections – to maximise outreach.

NDTV Exclusive | Inside Details Of BJP’s Strategy For Upcoming State Polls

The plan worked well. The BJP swept to power in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Chhattisgarh, winning the latter two back from the Congress as it dominated its Hindi heartland stronghold.

The BJP is well into its Lok Sabha election prep mode. Party sources said, as early as last month, that National General Secretaries had begun meeting every week (on Tuesdays) to develop strategies, including candidate placement. At one such meet, attended by Home Minister Amit Shah and party boss JP Nadda, the party said it would target first-time voters, beneficiaries of central schemes, and voters from backward classes, as well as young people and women, as it bids for a third consecutive term.

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.