Undue Influence as an Electoral Corrupt Practice

Electoral undue influence means interfering with a person's freedom to make electoral choices. Under Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, it is a corrupt practice involving direct or indirect interference, or an attempt to interfere, with the free exercise of an electoral right by specified persons connected with a candidate.

Whose conduct and which rights are covered

The provision protects electoral freedom, not merely freedom from physical force.

• The interference must be by the candidate or the candidate's agent, or by another person acting with the consent of the candidate or the candidate's election agent.
• Under Section 79(d), an electoral right includes the right to stand or not stand as a candidate, withdraw or not withdraw from candidature, and vote or refrain from voting.
• An attempt to interfere is covered; the statutory definition does not require the interference to succeed.

Conduct expressly treated as undue influence

Section 123(2) expressly identifies the following conduct without limiting the broader prohibition against interference with electoral freedom:

• Threatening a candidate or elector, or a person in whom either is interested, with injury of any kind constitutes interference.
• Such injury expressly includes social ostracism, excommunication, or expulsion from a caste or community.
• Inducing or attempting to induce a candidate or elector to believe that they, or someone in whom they are interested, will become an object of divine displeasure or spiritual censure also constitutes interference.

What the provision excludes

The law distinguishes coercive interference from legitimate political activity. Seeking electoral support is not, by itself, undue influence.

• A declaration of public policy or a promise of public action is not deemed interference under this clause.
• The mere exercise of a legal right, without an intention to interfere with an electoral right, is also excluded.

Consequence for an election

Under Section 100(1)(b), a court must declare a returned candidate's election void if it finds that a corrupt practice was committed by the returned candidate or their election agent, or by another person with the consent of either. This makes the identity of the person responsible and the required consent important when applying the provision.