Can The Prevention Of Corruption Act, 1988 Tackle Electoral Bribery
- IJLLR Journal
- Jan 27
- 2 min read
Mahi Sharma, MIT WPU, Pune
ABSTRACT
Electoral bribery continues to be a common problem affecting democratic processes in India. From cash-for-vote scandals to giving out freebies to sway voters, these inducements undermine voters' freedom to choose and weaken the fairness of elections. Although electoral bribery is considered corrupt under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the enforcement of this law is weak. The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, was mainly created to deal with corruption by government officials and offers a stronger legal framework.
This seminar paper looks into whether the PCA can be used to address electoral bribery, especially in cases involving public officials, misuse of government resources, or gaining electoral advantage through abuse of power. The analysis finds that while the PCA can target some types of electoral bribery, especially when public servants misuse their official position, limitations in legal doctrine, unclear laws, and the way the RPA is structured prevent the PCA from being a complete solution. Changes to laws and clearer judicial guidance are needed to better coordinate these legal rules.
INTRODUCTION
Bribery in elections is among the oldest complaints of democratic government. In India, where elections are festivals of democracy, the role of money has also grown problematic in the system. Every general and state election cycle, the ECI reports having seized crores of rupees in cash, alcohol, freebies and bribes. Bribery has a ripple effect, it alters voter behaviour, promotes political patronage, increases the cost of election campaigns, pushes candidates to be more openly corrupt and can even turn liberal democracy into a convenient facade.
Various rules are in place to stop such misconduct. The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA), specifically deals with electoral bribery. The Indian Penal Code (IPC), especially Sections 171B–171E, makes bribery in elections a crime. The Election Commission also issues Model Code of Conduct (MCC) guidelines to try to prevent
inducements.
However, the system still faces problems. There is a big gap between what the law says and how it is put into practice. Cases under the RPA for corrupt practices happen rarely and mostly depend on election petitions, which are only filed after results are announced. Criminal cases under the IPC are very uncommon. The MCC does not have legal power.
This raises an interesting and less explored question: Can the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, a law aimed at fighting corruption in public offices, be used to deal with electoral bribery?
