सं Samvidhan

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 172

Personation at elections

Why this exists

Free and fair elections depend on each eligible voter casting only one genuine vote in their own identity. Historically, election laws across democracies have criminalized 'personation'—pretending to be another voter—because it directly corrupts the counting of votes and undermines public trust in results. India's earlier Penal Code (Section 171D) contained a nearly identical provision, and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 carried it forward as Section 172 while modernizing the code's structure.

How courts read it

Indian courts, interpreting the predecessor provision under the Penal Code, have treated personation as an offence complete the moment a false application for a ballot is made or a second vote is sought—actual success in casting the fraudulent vote is not required. Courts have also read the abetment clause broadly, holding that arranging or facilitating another's impersonation is equally punishable, in line with the general principle that electoral fraud statutes are meant to deter attempts, not just completed acts.

Common misconceptions
  • Myth: You can vote in place of a deceased relative if they're still on the voter list.
    Fact: Using a deceased person's name to obtain a ballot is expressly criminalized as personation, regardless of whether they remain on the electoral roll.
  • Myth: The crime only happens if the fraudulent vote is actually counted or changes the result.
    Fact: Courts have read the offence as complete once the false application for a voting paper is made, whether or not the vote is ultimately cast or counted.
  • Myth: All proxy voting is illegal personation.
    Fact: The provision explicitly exempts voting as an authorised proxy under any law currently in force, such as recognized proxy-voting arrangements for specific voter categories.