Politicians' deviance, electoral offences and accountability mechanisms
White Collar Crimes · Unit III · Topic 9 of 17 · 5 min read
On this page
Cases checked to exist. Read the judgment before quoting a holding.
Every case cited here has been checked to exist — the citation resolves and names the right parties. The propositions attributed to each case have not been verified line by line against the judgment. Case names link through to the full judgment: read it before quoting a holding in an examination answer, and never carry a proposition from notes into court on trust.
1. Forms of political deviance
- Corruption in office: kickbacks on contracts, misuse of discretionary powers, allotment of land and licences to relatives and supporters.
- Criminalisation of politics: persons facing serious criminal charges contesting and winning, and parties fielding them because they can win.
- Electoral malpractice: buying votes with cash, liquor or gifts; booth capturing; intimidation; impersonation; spending beyond the limit; false declarations.
- Appeals to religion, caste and community for votes, and hate speech.
- Defection for money or office, and “horse-trading” in no-confidence motions and Rajya Sabha elections.
- Bribery for votes and questions in the House.
- Opaque political funding, which links donors to later policy favours.
- Misuse of State machinery: using the police and investigating agencies against opponents, and official resources for campaigning.
2. Electoral offences and corrupt practices
Representation of the People Act, 1951. Corrupt practices are listed in section 123: bribery; undue influence; appeal on the ground of religion, race, caste, community or language, or use of religious symbols; promoting enmity between classes; booth capturing; incurring expenditure beyond the prescribed limit; and obtaining the help of government servants. A corrupt practice proved in an election petition voids the election and leads to disqualification under section 8A. In Abhiram Singh v. C.D. Commachen, 2017 INSC 3, (2017) 2 SCC 629, a seven-judge bench held by majority that “his religion” in section 123(3) refers to the religion of the candidate, his agent, the voter or anyone else, so any appeal for votes on the ground of religion is a corrupt practice.
Electoral offences in Part VII of the Act include promoting enmity in connection with elections (section 125), filing a false affidavit or concealing information in the nomination (section 125A), restrictions on printing pamphlets and posters (section 127A), and booth capturing (section 135A).
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Chapter IX (old IPC Chapter IXA, sections 171A to 171I): definitions (section 169), bribery (section 170), undue influence (section 171), personation (section 172), punishment for bribery (section 173, up to one year or fine), punishment for undue influence or personation (section 174), false statement in connection with an election (section 175), illegal payments (section 176) and failure to keep election accounts (section 177).
3. Disqualification for crime
Section 8 of the 1951 Act disqualifies a person convicted of listed offences, including offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (section 8(1)(m)), and any person convicted and sentenced to two years or more (section 8(3)), for the period of sentence and six years after release. Section 8(4) used to let a sitting member continue if he appealed within three months. In Lily Thomas v. Union of India, 2013 INSC 456, (2013) 7 SCC 653, the Supreme Court struck down section 8(4) as beyond Parliament's power, because Articles 102 and 191 do not allow a different rule for sitting members. A sitting member is now disqualified from the date of conviction, unless the conviction itself is stayed.
4. Disclosure of antecedents and the judicial response
- Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms, 2002 INSC 253, (2002) 5 SCC 294: voters have a right under Article 19(1)(a) to know the criminal antecedents, assets, liabilities and educational qualifications of candidates; the Election Commission was directed to require affidavits. Parliament's attempt to dilute this by section 33B was struck down in People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India, 2003 INSC 176. Section 33A now requires the information.
- Manoj Narula v. Union of India, 2014 INSC 568, (2014) 9 SCC 1: the Court would not add a disqualification for ministers, but said the Prime Minister and Chief Ministers are expected, as constitutional trust, not to appoint persons charged with serious offences.
- Public Interest Foundation v. Union of India, 2018 INSC 862, (2019) 3 SCC 224: the Court could not disqualify candidates merely on charges being framed, as that is for Parliament, but directed candidates to declare pending cases in bold and parties to publish them widely, and urged Parliament to legislate.
- Rambabu Singh Thakur v. Sunil Arora, 2020 INSC 177, (2020) 3 SCC 733: parties must publish on their websites and in newspapers the criminal cases of their candidates and the reasons for selecting them, which must relate to merit, not mere winnability.
- Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 113 (15 February 2024): a Constitution Bench struck down the Electoral Bond Scheme and the related amendments permitting anonymous political donations, as violating the voter's right to information, and directed disclosure of the bond data.
5. Bribery in the House and defection
The JMM bribery case, P.V. Narasimha Rao (1998), gave immunity under Article 105(2) to members who took bribes and voted; that was overruled by Sita Soren v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 161, which held that bribery is not protected by parliamentary privilege. Both are discussed in the note on the Prevention of Corruption Act. Defection is controlled by the Tenth Schedule (1985), upheld, except for the original bar on judicial review, in Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu, 1991 INSC 287.
6. Accountability mechanisms: a summary
- Criminal law: the Prevention of Corruption Act (legislators are public servants), the BNS and the money laundering law.
- Election law: election petitions for corrupt practices, disqualification under sections 8 and 8A, and the Election Commission's powers under Article 324, including the Model Code of Conduct.
- Ombudsman: the Lokpal has jurisdiction over the Prime Minister, ministers and MPs; the Lokayukta over State ministers and MLAs.
- Transparency: affidavits under section 33A, the Right to Information Act, and the publication of antecedents.
- Parliamentary discipline: ethics committees and expulsion for misconduct.
- Courts and media: public interest litigation and investigative journalism.
The N.N. Vohra Committee (1993) on the nexus between criminals, politicians and bureaucrats is the leading official account of criminalisation and has its own note.
How this is examined
June 2025: a note on politicians' deviance. January 2026: a note on political deviance and accountability mechanisms. Write the forms first, then the mechanisms, each with its case: ADR for disclosure, Lily Thomas for disqualification, Public Interest Foundation and Rambabu Singh Thakur for criminalisation, Sita Soren for bribery in the House, and the electoral bonds judgment for funding.
Now try the real questions: White Collar Crimes past question papers.