The Criminalisation of Politics

The steady erosion of Indian politics over decades, with the decline sharpening in recent years, is an ever-present but often silent crisis. Politics shapes the bureaucracy and influences business, civil society and the media, so we need governance that is free of the criminal element. Ability on its own is not enough. A genuine commitment to public service matters just as much. This is no longer about a single political party. It is about the health of the political system as a whole.

These are study notes on the criminalisation of politics in India: what it means, how serious it is, what the Supreme Court has said, and what can be done. You can find the rest of our Indian Polity study notes alongside this one.

In his statement on 26 November 1949, Dr Rajendra Prasad, President of the Constituent Assembly of India, said, "If the people chosen are capable and have good character and integrity, they will be able to make the best of a bad Constitution. If they do not have these, the Constitution will not be able to help the country."

What does criminalisation of politics mean?

Criminalisation of politics refers to the growing presence of people with criminal records in the electoral process, both as candidates who contest elections and as party workers. When those accused or convicted of serious crimes are chosen to make and enforce the law, public trust in democracy weakens.

How serious is the problem?

According to data analysed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), an independent watchdog, a large share of Members of Parliament have declared criminal cases against themselves. In the 17th Lok Sabha, elected in 2019, 43 per cent of MPs declared criminal cases, and 29 per cent declared serious criminal offences. Criminal proceedings had been declared by 24 per cent of Rajya Sabha members, with 12 per cent facing serious charges.

Serious offences here include charges such as murder, attempt to murder, kidnapping and crimes against women. The point of these numbers is not any one party. It is that people facing grave charges keep getting party tickets and keep winning.

The 2018 Supreme Court directions and the 2020 contempt case

A two judge Bench of the Supreme Court delivered a judgement on contempt petitions about the criminalisation of politics and the non compliance with directions given by a Constitution Bench in the case of Public Interest Foundation and Others versus Union of India and Another in 2018.

The Court noted that political parties offered no real explanation for why candidates with pending criminal cases were selected in the first place. Although the following six directions were first given in 2018, parties had not followed them, which is why the matter returned to the Court in 2020.

1. Political parties must publish full information about candidates with pending criminal cases on their websites, along with the reasons for selecting them.
2. The reasons for selection must be based on the candidate's qualifications, achievements and merit, and not on so called winnability at the polls.
3. This information must also be published in one local vernacular newspaper and one national daily, and on the party's official social media platforms.
4. The information must be made public within 48 hours of the candidate's selection, or two weeks before the first date for filing nominations, whichever is earlier.
5. Within 72 hours of the candidate's selection, the party must submit a compliance report to the Election Commission.
6. If a party fails to file a compliance report, the Election Commission will bring the non compliance to the notice of the Supreme Court.

The way ahead

Voter education is a demand side solution, and civil society carries much of that responsibility. As Franklin Delano Roosevelt argued, a democracy cannot thrive unless the people who cast their votes are prepared to choose well, which makes education a true safeguard of democracy. This echoes Gandhi's emphasis on the importance of an informed voter.

More democratic and transparent political parties may be the most important supply side reform. We are unlikely to have open, accountable governments if the parties themselves remain closed and top heavy. Change of this kind will take sustained public pressure.

Civil society also needs a clear, positive vision, not only outrage after a scandal. As the ADR study notes, ordinary people are often more concerned with day to day difficulties than with building an ideal democracy, so one useful approach is to listen first to what people want and then help inform their choices. As Thomas Jefferson put it, the safest home for the ultimate powers of a society is the people themselves, and if they seem not enlightened enough to use that power wisely, the answer is not to take it away but to inform their judgement.

In short, decriminalising politics needs all of the following working together:

• A vigilant Election Commission.
• Responsible and accountable political parties and leaders.
• Aware and informed citizens.
• Effective laws and honest implementation of those laws.
• A free media that generates public awareness.

Why it still matters

This is not a settled chapter of the past. The problem has grown at every recent general election. After the 2024 Lok Sabha election, ADR found that 251 of the 543 winning MPs, about 46 per cent, had declared criminal cases, the highest share ever recorded. 170 of them, about 31 per cent, declared serious cases such as murder, attempt to murder, kidnapping and crimes against women, and 27 were already convicted. The rise is steady: the share of MPs with serious cases was 14 per cent in 2009, 21 per cent in 2014 and 29 per cent in 2019.

ADR also found that in 2024 a candidate with a declared criminal case had roughly a 15 per cent chance of winning, far higher than a candidate with a clean record. In other words a criminal record is often an advantage at the ballot box rather than a handicap, which is exactly the puzzle these notes describe.

The debate is live in the Supreme Court right now. A petition filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay asks for a lifetime ban on convicted politicians. At present, under Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, a convicted politician is barred only while in jail and for six years after release. The Union government has told the Court that it opposes a lifetime ban, arguing that six years is enough and that the length of any disqualification is for Parliament to decide. In early 2025 a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan again described the criminalisation of politics as a serious issue and asked the government and the Election Commission to respond. Meanwhile, roughly 5,000 criminal cases against sitting MPs and MLAs remain pending, and the Court has ordered special benches in every High Court to monitor speedy trials.

To see how a topic like this connects to live world affairs, economics and law, explore the Learnacy Hub, and browse more explainers in the One Young India resources.

Sources

1. Association for Democratic Reforms: Record 46 per cent of newly elected Lok Sabha MPs facing criminal cases (2024)
2. Business Standard: 251 of newly elected Lok Sabha MPs face criminal cases, 27 convicted (ADR)
3. Scroll: Centre opposes lifetime election ban for convicted politicians
4. Deccan Herald: Lifetime ban on convicted politicians, Supreme Court asks Centre and EC to respond
5. Drishti IAS: Supreme Court plea for lifetime ban on convicted politicians

Key takeaways

• Criminalisation of politics refers to the growing presence of people with criminal records in the electoral process as candidates and party workers.
• According to ADR data, 43% of MPs in the 17th Lok Sabha (2019) declared criminal cases, and 29% declared serious criminal offences.
• The Supreme Court in 2018 directed political parties to publicly publish information about candidates with pending criminal cases along with reasons for their selection.
• The problem has worsened over time - 46% of winning MPs in 2024 declared criminal cases, up from 14% in 2009, making a criminal record often an advantage rather than a handicap.
• Solving this requires coordinated efforts: a vigilant Election Commission, accountable political parties, informed citizens, effective laws, and a free media.

Test yourself

What is criminalisation of politics?

Criminalisation of politics refers to the growing presence of people with criminal records in the electoral process, both as candidates who contest elections and as party workers.

What percentage of Lok Sabha MPs had declared criminal cases in 2019 and in 2024?

In 2019, 43% of MPs declared criminal cases. In 2024, this rose to 46% of the 543 winning MPs.

What did the Supreme Court direct in 2018 regarding candidates with criminal cases?

The Court directed political parties to publish full information about candidates with pending criminal cases on their websites, along with reasons for selecting them based on qualifications, achievements and merit, not winnability. This had to be published in a local vernacular newspaper, a national daily, and on social media, within 48 hours of selection or two weeks before filing nominations.