This research explores how voters view different types of corruption through a survey experiment conducted among Indian citizens.

Methods: Respondents were presented with scenarios involving political favors obtained via money, but differing on the source and use of funds.

* Personal Use Scenario: Money used for personal enrichment by the politician.

* Electoral Bribery Scenario: Money used to buy votes from constituents.

Researchers then assessed public sentiment toward punishing these corrupt politicians.

Findings: Voters demonstrated significantly different reactions based on how they perceived the money was being misused. When told about vote buying, respondents were less inclined to support harsh penalties for the corrupt official compared to when informed of personal enrichment.

* Punishment preferences varied substantially between scenarios.

* The welfare impact assessment differed according to corruption type.

Implications: These results highlight that voters' punitive responses to political corruption are not uniform but depend heavily on whether they believe the money benefited others or enriched the politician personally. This nuanced understanding of public perception provides crucial insights for anti-corruption policy and voter education initiatives.