BNS 174 : Punishment for undue influence or personation at an election.

---

Introduction of BNS 174

Free and fair elections are the lifeline of democracy, and any attempt to manipulate voters or distort the electoral process threatens its integrity. Section 174 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, deals with punishment for undue influence or personation at elections. It penalizes those who pressure or threaten voters and those who fraudulently vote in someone else’s name. The provision ensures that elections are conducted fairly, preventing both intimidation and impersonation from undermining public confidence in the democratic process.

---

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Section 174 replaces the old Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 171-F.

---

---

What is BNS Section 174 ?

BNS Section 174 makes it a criminal offense to engage in undue influence or personation at an election. Anyone who attempts to control or influence a voter’s decision unfairly, or pretends to be someone else while voting, can face legal consequences.

---

---

Under Section 174 of the bns act 2023

Whoever at an election exerts undue influence or commits personation, or attempts to do so, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.

Section 174 brings together two closely related election offences — undue influence and personation — and prescribes punishment for either. The provision is aimed at protecting the free will of voters and the integrity of the election process by penalising both coercion and impersonation.

What the two terms mean

• Undue influence — any act (or threat of act) that improperly pressures, intimidates or induces a voter or candidate so that they cannot freely exercise their electoral right. This includes threats of physical harm, threats to family or property, social or economic pressure, misuse of official position, or invoking spiritual/religious sanction to influence voting.
• Personation — applying for or casting a vote in the name of another person (whether that person is alive, dead or fictitious) or attempting to do so; it also covers voting more than once in the same election by using another identity.

The conduct covered

• Direct acts: threatening a voter at the polling booth, blocking access so a voter cannot reach the polling station, or casting a vote using someone else’s name.
• Indirect acts: organising a group to intimidate voters, spreading false claims that a particular vote will bring divine punishment, or procuring false identity documents so someone can impersonate a real voter.
• Attempts and preparations: even if the personation or coercion does not succeed, an attempt (e.g., applying for a voting paper under a false name, or issuing threats intended to influence) is punishable.

Mental element

To attract Section 174, the actor must ordinarily have intended to interfere with free electoral choice or must have acted in a way that is likely to interfere. In practice, evidence of threats, coercive conduct, or deliberate impersonation shows the required intent or knowledge.

Offence classification

• Punishment: Up to 1 year imprisonment, or fine, or both.
• Cognizability: Non-cognizable (police normally need magistrate’s order or complaint to start certain actions) — check local practice; investigating agencies may follow election-law procedure.
• Bailable: Yes — the offence is generally bailable.
• Compoundable: No — the offence cannot be privately settled or withdrawn; prosecution proceeds unless the court directs otherwise.
• Trial: Triable by a Magistrate of the First Class (summary/less grave trial procedure for such offences).

Note: classification (cognizable/bailable/compoundable) can be phrased differently in drafting; follow official text/procedural rules when preparing court documents.

Key elements

1. Timing & context: Act must occur in relation to an election (application for vote, voting at polling station, or actions intended to affect election outcome).
2. Actus reus (prohibited act): Threat, coercion, pressure, inducement, impersonation, making false application for voting paper, or voting more than once.
3. Mens rea (mental element): Intent to influence, intimidate, or fraudulently obtain a vote (or knowledge that the act is likely to have that effect).
4. Target: Voter or candidate whose electoral right is interfered with.
5. Means: Physical force, threats, promises, misuse of office, social/economic pressure, religious coercion, or false identity.
6. Attempts covered: Preparatory acts and unsuccessful attempts are punishable.
7. Participants: Principal offender, abettors, and anyone who procures/assists personation or undue influence can be liable.
8. Evidence types: Witness testimony (voter, polling officer), CCTV/phone footage, written or oral threats, identity documents, party agent admissions, logs of multiple votes, or records of false applications.
9. Overlap with other offences: Conduct may also amount to bribery (BNS 170/173), criminal intimidation, or obstruction, and prosecution may proceed under multiple sections depending on facts.
10. Remedial relief: Apart from criminal punishment, election authorities may declare the vote(s) void, or the election petition route may be used to challenge results.

Examples

• Example 1 — Threat at polling booth: A local leader tells village voters they will be evicted from homes if they vote for Candidate B. Voters fear eviction and some change votes. The leader is guilty of undue influence under Section 174.
• Example 2 — Spiritual coercion: A religious figure announces that voting for a certain party will bring divine curse. Using spiritual authority to coerce votes is undue influence.
• Example 3 — Personation (dead voter): A person uses the name of a deceased relative to obtain a voting paper and cast a vote. That is personation under Section 174.
• Example 4 — Multiple voting attempt: An individual votes once, then tries to obtain a second ballot using a false identity — even if stopped before the second vote, the attempt is punishable.
• Example 5 — Organised intimidation: A group is hired to stand outside polling stations and threaten certain communities; organisers and agents can be prosecuted for undue influence and abetment.

How Section 174 differs from related sections (short comparisons)

• Vs. Bribery (BNS 170 / 173): Bribery involves offering or receiving gratification to influence votes (money, gifts, treats). Section 174 targets coercion and impersonation — pressure and fraud rather than payment. Facts can overlap (e.g., offering a gift plus a threat); both offences may be charged.
• Vs. Personation-alone sections (e.g., earlier numbering): Personation is often a standalone offence; Section 174 simply consolidates punishment for personation together with undue influence for clarity and enforcement.

Why Section 174 matters

• Protects free choice: Ensures voters are not coerced or tricked — the cornerstone of a valid election.
• Deters organised fraud: Penalising both intimidation and impersonation raises the cost of attempts to manipulate results.
• Keeps election day safe: Targets conduct that creates fear or disorder at polling stations.
• Complements electoral administration: Works alongside voter rolls, IDs, polling agents and monitoring to keep the system honest.

Evidence & prosecution tips

• Collect contemporaneous evidence: Statements from polling officers, party agents, and voters recorded soon after incidents are strong.
• Preserve identity records: If personation is suspected, compare application forms, ID documents, and entry lists.
• Use technology: CCTV, phone location data, or photos can corroborate position and conduct.
• Look for patterns: Repeated incidents at the same booths or clusters of suspicious applications suggest organised personation.
• Coordinate with election officials: Returning officers and election observers often have statutory powers to record and act on such misconduct.

Short legal/disclaimer note

This explanation is informational and written to match the style of your previous section write-ups. It does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific guidance, court filings, or formal legal opinion, consult a qualified lawyer or election-law practitioner.

---

Section 174 BNS Overview

BNS Section 174 addresses illegal activities during elections, such as exerting pressure on voters or pretending to be someone else (personation) to cast a vote. The section aims to penalize any behavior that undermines the integrity of elections, with punishments that may include imprisonment for up to one year or a fine.

BNS Section 174: 10 Key Points Explained

1. Undue Influence in Elections
   Undue influence refers to using pressure, threats, or coercion to manipulate someone’s vote. For example, if a person threatens another with harm unless they vote for a particular candidate, it constitutes undue influence.
2. Personation in Elections
   Personation is when someone votes in the name of another person, whether that person is alive, dead, or fictional. This is illegal, as it misrepresents a genuine voter and distorts the election results.
3. Punishment for Offense
   The person committing undue influence or personation can face imprisonment for up to one year. The severity of the punishment depends on the nature of the offense and the discretion of the court.
4. Fine as Punishment
   In addition to or instead of imprisonment, the offender may be required to pay a fine. This is intended to further penalize unlawful election interference and discourage such practices.
5. Bailable Offense
   BNS Section 174 is classified as a bailable offense, meaning the accused has the right to apply for bail. Once bail is granted, they may be released while awaiting their court trial.
6. Non-Cognizable Offense
   This offense is non-cognizable, meaning the police cannot arrest someone without a warrant. A warrant is necessary before any arrest can be made, ensuring legal protection for the accused.
7. Non-Compoundable Offense
   The offense is non-compoundable, meaning it cannot be settled out of court. The case must proceed through the legal system, and a judge will decide the outcome.
8. Tried by Magistrate
   Cases under BNS Section 174 are tried by a Magistrate of the First Class. This means that the magistrate has the authority to hear and judge the case based on the evidence presented.
9. Protects Election Integrity
   The section is designed to protect the fairness of elections by ensuring that all voters can freely choose their candidates without being manipulated or influenced by others.
10. Electoral Fraud Prevention
    By punishing undue influence and personation, this law serves as a deterrent to electoral fraud. It ensures that those attempting to alter election outcomes through illegal means are held accountable.

Examples of BNS Section 174

1. Example 1: Threatening a Voter
   A political party worker threatens a voter, saying that their family will face harm if they do not vote for a specific candidate. This is an example of undue influence, and the worker can be punished under BNS Section 174.
2. Example 2: Voting in Another’s Name
   A person goes to a polling station and votes in the name of someone else who is dead. This is personation and is punishable under this section, as it distorts the election process by using fraudulent votes.

---

174 BNS Punishment

1. Imprisonment: The guilty person can be sentenced to jail for a period that may extend up to 1 year.
2. Fine: Instead of or along with jail time, the offender may be required to pay a fine.

---

---

BNS 174 bailable or not ?

Yes, BNS Section 174 is a bailable offense, which means the accused can apply for bail and be released while awaiting trial.

---

Comparison Table – BNS Section 174 vs IPC Section 171F

---

BNS Section 174 FAQs

---

Conclusion

BNS Section 174 plays a crucial role in protecting the fairness and transparency of elections. By punishing both undue influence and personation, it ensures that voters can exercise their rights without fear, pressure, or fraud. The law aligns with IPC Section 171F but uses simpler and clearer wording for better enforcement. By addressing threats, intimidation, and fraudulent voting, this section strengthens democracy and prevents dishonest practices from undermining electoral outcomes.

---

Need Legal Support?

If you’re facing court proceedings, marriage-related issues, or any legal matter, our team at Marriage Solution – Lawyer Help is ready to guide you. Just complete our easy online enquiry form, and we’ll connect you with the right legal assistance tailored to your needs. helpful. By completing our enquiry form and submitting it online, we can provide customized guidance to navigate through the process.

---

Finished with BNS 174 ? Continue exploring the next provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. Each section includes explanations, examples, and plain-language breakdowns for easy understanding.

• BNS 175 : False statement in connection with an election.
• https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/bns-175/
• BNS 176 : Illegal payments in connection with an election.
• https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/bns-176/
• BNS 177 : Failure to keep election accounts.
• https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/bns-177/

Chapter X – Of Offences Relating To Coin, Currency Notes, Bank Notes, And Government Stamps

• BNS 178 : Counterfeiting coin, government stamps, currency-notes or bank-notes.
• https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/bns-178/
• BNS 179 : Using as genuine, forged or counterfeit coin, Government stamp, currency-notes or bank notes.
• https://marriagesolution.in/bns_section/bns-179/

Full IPC Section List: https://marriagesolution.in/ipc-section-list

All Indian Law & Blogs: https://marriagesolution.in/indian-law/

Full BNSS Section List: https://marriagesolution.in/bnss_section-list

---