Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 171H
repealedIllegal payments in connection with an election
Whoever without the general or special authority in writing of a candidate incurs or authorizes expenses on account of the holding of any public meeting, or upon any advertisement, circular or publication, or in any other way whatsoever for the purpose of promoting or procuring the election of such candidate, shall be punished with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees;
Why this exists
Colonial-era election law-makers wanted to keep track of who was spending money on a candidate's behalf, so that election expenses could be properly accounted for and candidates could not dodge spending limits by letting unauthorized supporters spend money 'off the books.' By requiring written authorization, the law creates a paper trail linking every rupee spent to a candidate's knowledge and consent.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: The candidate gets punished if supporters spend money without permission.
Fact: This section punishes the person who spends the money without authorization, not the candidate, unless the candidate was involved in giving that authorization. - Myth: Any verbal approval from the candidate is enough.
Fact: The law specifically requires 'authority in writing,' so a verbal okay does not satisfy this legal requirement.