CRIMINOLOGY :-

MEANING SCOPE NATURE AND THEORIES OF

CRIMINOLOGY :-

Criminology is the scientific study that helps us understand crime, the

people who commit crimes (criminals), and how the criminal justice
system responds to these offences. It allows us to analyze criminal
behavior, the reasons behind it, and how we can prevent and control
crime.

Criminology is the systematic study of crime, criminals and the intricate

web of factors influencing criminal behaviour within society. This
interdisciplinary field draws from psychology, sociology, law, economics,
biology and other sciences to explore the causes, patterns and
consequences of criminal activities. Criminologists aim to understand why
individuals engage in unlawful acts, whether driven by social, economic,
psychological or environmental factors.

Nature
1. Interdisciplinary: Criminology draws knowledge from various fields, like
sociology, psychology, law, biology, economics, and anthropology. By using
multiple perspectives, criminologists get a well-rounded understanding of
crime and its causes.
2. Empirical: Criminology relies on research methods that involve gathering
real-world data and evidence to study criminal behavior and the criminal
justice system. This data-driven approach helps us discover crime patterns,
understand why crimes happen, and evaluate the effectiveness of crime
prevention methods.
3. Theoretical: Criminology is based on theories that attempt to explain why
people commit crimes. Some theories focus on the idea of deterrence,
while others explore how social influences or personal experiences may
lead individuals to criminal behavior.
4. Applied: Criminological research is practical and applied to real-world
problems. Criminologists work with law enforcement agencies,
policymakers, and social service organizations to develop effective crime
prevention strategies and improve the criminal justice system.

Scope
1. Crime Causation: Criminologists study the factors that contribute to
criminal behavior, such as poverty, social influences, mental health issues,
or biological factors.
 2. Criminal Typologies: They examine different types of criminals, their
characteristics, and the patterns of crimes they commit. This knowledge
can help identify specific prevention strategies for different types of
offenders.
3. Victimology: Criminologists analyze the impact of crime on victims, their
experiences, and needs. Understanding victim experiences helps in
designing better support systems for victims.
4. Criminal Justice System: Criminology evaluates how the criminal justice
system works, including the police, courts, and corrections. It looks at how
effectively the system deals with crime and criminals.
5. Crime Prevention and Control: Criminologists develop and assess crime
prevention strategies, rehabilitation programs, and ways to reduce repeat
offenses (recidivism).
6. Comparative Criminology: This area involves comparing crime rates,
criminal justice policies, and cultural differences across different countries
and societies to identify effective approaches to crime control.
7. White-Collar Crime: Criminologists study non-violent crimes committed
by people in positions of trust or authority, such as embezzlement or
corporate fraud.
8. Cybercrime: Criminology investigates crimes committed in the digital
realm, like hacking, identity theft, and online scams.

Classical theory
In the 18th century when the society was moving from a system of feudalism
to a system where all the citizens were considered equal and were not
divided based on class, the classical theorists of criminology were of the view
that crimes are a result of an irrational decision or an individual’s choice. The
states were empowered to develop codified laws for crime and ensure that all
the citizens are treated equally. Any commission of a crime by an individual
was considered a violation of the social contract. The social contract is an
agreement between the citizens and the state, whereby the state promises to
protect the citizens in return for citizens giving up their rights. Cesare
Beccaria, an Italian philosopher, found that the impact of crime affected
society as a whole, and therefore the state must take all the appropriate
actions to establish law and order in the state.

Positivist theory
As the theory of positivism began to take form and more scientific ways were
developed to overcome the societal problems, two areas of criminology
interested the positivist. Firstly, the Idea as to what contributed to an
individual in becoming an offender. Secondly, getting deviated from the
general societal norms and the social contribution mechanism in the society
whose operation no longer ensured that the “system was working as a
whole”.

The positivists focused on the wrongdoer and the individual and societal
characteristics that influenced an individual to commit the offence as
compared to classical theorists focused on law and the nature of the offence.

Strain theory
Strain theory was the first theory to argue that crime was a social
phenomenon and a function of social processes and structures. Strain
theorists believed that crime represents a violation of societal norms, values,
morals, and behaviour that are agreed upon by the society as compared to
the positive theorists who believed that crimes are a result of individual
deficiency. The strain theorists pointed out that individuals commit crime as
an alternative to meet their needs when the citizens do not have equal
access to the resources of the state. According to these theorists, crime is
best addressed when individual rehabilitation is combined with institutional
reforms to increase access to the social programs available. They also advise
on removing the causes of strain by providing access to social programs to
the individuals who are prone to the maximum risk. They believe that by
removing the causes of strain, the state can prevent individuals from
committing crimes.

Critical theory
Critical theory of criminology is concerned with how the structure of power
works within society and how these powers are placed in the hands of certain
privileged citizens of the state resulting in marginalized communities
committing a crime. Critical theorists are divided into two orientations,
namely the structuralist and the post-modernists.

DIFFERENCE BTW CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL

LAW :-

Criminology is the study of crimes and other aspects related to it while

criminal justice is the application of criminology. The criminal justice system
is not one authority. It comprises various multi dictionary units that operate
from ground level to the upper elite level. Criminal law seeks to find the
causes of crime, enforce laws, investigate the crime, punishes the offenders
and provides justice to those who are victims. It also seeks to rehabilitate
offenders. A forensic science expert who generally applies forensic science to
trace the culprit, he is said to be an expert in both the criminal law and in
criminology because he studies and observes the criminal behaviour and also
investigates regarding crime-related aspects.

Criminal law and criminology both are related to each other. They both are
interlinked. Both criminal law and criminology are required for lawyers and
law enforcement agencies who deal with the psychology of criminals and
various aspects related to crimes. Criminologists basically focus on the
pattern, behaviour and sociological aspects of crimes. They tend to observe
the patterns in criminal behaviour.

Criminal justice is an established legal system which investigates crimes,

arrests criminals, detains them and prosecutes the guilty ones. Criminal law
is directly interlinked to law enforcement agencies because their primary
work is to detect the crimes and arrest the people who are suspected of
committing any offence. Criminology, on the other hand, is the detailed study
of the root cause of the crimes, its origin and also the psychological
tendencies of a criminal and the effect of crimes on society and on various
parameters.

Schools Of Criminology:-
Schools of criminology are different theoretical perspectives or
approaches that seek to understand the causes, dynamics, and patterns
of crime and criminal behaviour. These schools of criminology offer
varying explanations and solutions for understanding and addressing
crime, based on their unique perspectives and assumptions.

Pre-Classical School
The Pre-Classical School of Criminology is rooted in ancient Indian texts
and scriptures that contain principles of justice and punishment. This
school focuses on the concept of dharma, which refers to the moral and
ethical duties of individuals towards society, and the idea of karma, which
highlights the belief in the consequences of one’s actions.

This is one of the schools of criminology that emphasises the role of

religion, customs, and traditions in shaping the social control mechanisms
and maintaining law and order in society.
Key Concepts
Dharma: The concept of dharma is central to the Pre-Classical School of
criminology. It refers to the moral and ethical duties that individuals have
towards society and highlights the importance of adhering to social norms
and customs.

Karma: The concept of karma emphasises the belief in the consequences

of one’s actions, both in the present life and in future lives. It underscores
the idea of accountability and the notion that individuals are responsible
for their actions and their consequences.

Relevant Provisions
Manusmriti: Manusmriti, an ancient Indian text, is considered one of the
important sources of principles of justice and punishment in the Pre-
Classical School of criminology. It contains provisions related to social
norms, customs, and punishments for various crimes, reflecting the
emphasis on dharma and karma.

Contribution
The Pre-Classical School of Criminology has contributed to the
understanding of crime and punishment in ancient Indian society. It
highlights the significance of social norms, customs, and ethical
responsibilities in maintaining law and order.

While not directly influencing contemporary criminology in India, the

concepts of dharma and karma continue to shape cultural and religious
beliefs related to crime and justice.

Classical School of Criminology

The classical school of criminology is one of the oldest and most influential
schools of thought in the field of criminology. It emerged during the
Enlightenment period in the 18th century and is based on the idea that
individuals are rational beings who make choices based on their self-
interests.

According to the classical school, crime is seen as a result of individuals’

free will and rational decision-making, and it can be deterred through the
fear of punishment.

Key Concepts
Rationality: The classical school believes that individuals are rational
beings who make choices based on their self-interests. They weigh the
benefits and costs of committing a crime before making a decision.

Hedonism: The classical school assumes that individuals are motivated

by the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain. Therefore, they
commit crimes when they perceive the benefits of the crime to outweigh
the costs.
Punishment: The classical school emphasises the importance of
punishment as a deterrent to crime. It argues that the certainty, severity,
and swiftness of punishment can deter individuals from committing
crimes.

Relevant Provisions
Indian Penal Code (IPC): The IPC, which is the main criminal law statute
in India, reflects the classical school’s principles of deterrence through
punishment. It prescribes specific punishments for various crimes, with
the aim of deterring individuals from committing those crimes.

Contribution
The classical school of criminology has influenced the development of
criminal law and the criminal justice system in India. The principles of
deterrence through punishment are reflected in the Indian Penal Code,
which serves as the basis for the criminal justice system in the country.

Neo-Classical School
The Neo-Classical School of Criminology seeks to integrate the concepts of
free will and determinism, acknowledging that while individuals have the
capacity for free will, they are also influenced by various factors beyond
their control. The Neo-Classical School emphasises the need for a
balanced and holistic approach to understanding crime and criminal
behaviour, taking into consideration both individual agency and social
context.

Key Concepts
Integrative Approach: The Neo-Classical School advocates for an
integrative approach that combines the concepts of free will and
determinism. It acknowledges that individuals have the capacity for free
will, but they are also influenced by various biological, psychological, and
social factors that may limit their choices.

Mitigating Circumstances: The Neo-Classical School recognises the

importance of considering mitigating circumstances, such as mental
capacity, duress, provocation, and other factors that may affect an
individual’s culpability for a crime.

Relevant Provisions
The Neo-Classical School has influenced the development of sentencing
guidelines in some jurisdictions, which take into consideration both the
severity of the offence and the individual circumstances of the offender,
such as their criminal history, motivation, and potential for rehabilitation.

Contribution
The Neo-Classical School of Criminology has contributed to the recognition
of the complex interplay between individual agency and social context in
shaping criminal behaviour. It promotes a balanced and holistic approach
that considers both free will and determinism, and advocates for the
consideration of mitigating circumstances in the criminal justice system.

However, the Neo-Classical School has also been criticised for its potential
for subjectivity and inconsistency in determining mitigating circumstances
and evaluating an individual’s culpability for a crime.

Positivist School of Criminology

The positivist school of criminology emerged in the 19th century as a
response to the limitations of the classical school’s rational choice theory.
The positivist school argues that individuals are not always rational and
that various factors, such as biological, psychological, and social factors,
can influence their behaviour, including criminal behaviour.

According to the positivist school, crime is a result of internal and external

factors, and it can be better understood and managed through scientific
methods.

Key Concepts
Determinism: The positivist school rejects the idea of free will and
argues that individual’s behaviour, including criminal behaviour, is
determined by various factors, such as their biological makeup,
psychological traits, and social environment.

Scientific Methods: The positivist school advocates for the use of

scientific methods, such as empirical research and data analysis, to study
crime and criminal behaviour. It emphasises the importance of evidence-
based approaches in understanding and managing crime.

Rehabilitation: The positivist school believes that individuals who

engage in criminal behaviour can be rehabilitated through treatment and
intervention programs. It focuses on addressing the underlying causes of
criminal behaviour rather than punishing offenders.

Relevant Provisions
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: This
legislation, which deals with juvenile offenders, reflects the positivist
school’s emphasis on rehabilitation and reformation rather than
punishment. It provides for various measures, such as counselling,
education, and vocational training, for the rehabilitation of juvenile
offenders.

Contribution
The positivist school of criminology has contributed to the understanding
of crime and criminal behaviour in India by highlighting the importance of
scientific methods and evidence-based approaches. It has influenced the
development of policies and programs aimed at rehabilitating offenders
and addressing the underlying causes of crime, particularly in the context
of juvenile justice.

Sociological School of Criminology

The sociological school of criminology focuses on the social and structural
factors that contribute to crime and criminal behaviour. It examines how
social institutions, such as family, education, and the economy, influence
individuals’ behaviour and their likelihood of engaging in criminal
activities.

The sociological school argues that crime is a result of social inequalities,

social disorganisation, and the breakdown of social bonds.

Key Concepts
Social Structure: The sociological school emphasises the role of social
structure, including social class, poverty, and inequality, in shaping
individuals’ behaviour and their propensity to commit crimes. It highlights
how social inequalities and structural factors can contribute to crime and
criminal behaviour.

Social Disorganisation: The sociological school examines how the

breakdown of social institutions and social disorganisation in communities
can contribute to crime. It focuses on how factors such as neighbourhood
characteristics, community cohesion, and social control can influence
crime rates.

Social Bonds: The sociological school emphasises the importance of

social bonds, such as family, school, and community, in preventing crime.
It argues that individuals with strong social bonds are less likely to engage
in criminal activities.

Relevant Provisions
Prevention of Atrocities (Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes) Act,
1989: This legislation, which is aimed at protecting marginalised
communities from discrimination and violence, reflects the sociological
school’s emphasis on addressing social inequalities and structural factors
that contribute to crime. It provides for special provisions for the
prevention and punishment of offences against individuals belonging to
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

Contribution
The sociological school of criminology has contributed to the
understanding of crime and criminal behaviour in India by highlighting the
role of social structure and social factors in shaping individuals’ behaviour.
It has influenced the development of policies and programs aimed at
addressing social inequalities, promoting social cohesion, and preventing
crime.
Psychological School of Criminology
The psychological school of criminology focuses on the psychological
factors that contribute to crime and criminal behaviour. It examines how
individual traits, personality disorders, and mental health issues can
influence individuals’ behaviour and their likelihood of engaging in
criminal activities. The psychological school argues that crime is a result
of psychological factors, such as personality disorders, cognitive
processes, and emotional disturbances.

Key Concepts
Individual Traits: The psychological school emphasises the role of
individual traits, such as impulsivity, sensation-seeking, and empathy, in
shaping individuals’ behaviour and their propensity to commit crimes. It
highlights how personality characteristics can influence criminal
behaviour.

Cognitive Processes: The psychological school examines how cognitive

processes, such as decision-making, moral reasoning, and problem-
solving, can influence individuals’ behaviour and their likelihood of
engaging in criminal activities. It focuses on how cognitive factors can
affect the way individuals perceive and respond to the social environment.

Mental Health Issues: The psychological school recognises the role of

mental health issues, such as personality disorders, substance abuse, and
psychopathy, in contributing to criminal behaviour. It highlights how
mental health issues can affect individuals’ behaviour and decision-
making processes.

Relevant Provisions
Mental Healthcare Act, 2017: This legislation, which is aimed at
protecting the rights of individuals with mental illness, reflects the
psychological school’s emphasis on addressing mental health issues in the
context of crime and criminal justice.

It provides for the rights and care of individuals with mental illness,
including provisions for their treatment, rehabilitation, and protection from
abuse and discrimination. It also recognises the importance of mental
health assessments and interventions in the criminal justice system.

Contribution
The psychological school of criminology has contributed to the
understanding of crime and criminal behaviour in India by highlighting the
role of psychological factors in shaping individuals’ behaviour.

It has influenced the development of policies and programs aimed at

addressing mental health issues, promoting mental health assessments in
the criminal justice system, and providing appropriate care and
rehabilitation for individuals with mental illness who are involved in the
criminal justice system.

Economic School of Criminology

The economic school of criminology focuses on the economic factors
contributing to crime and criminal behaviour. It examines how economic
disparities, poverty, unemployment, and lack of opportunities can
influence individuals’ behaviour and their likelihood of engaging in
criminal activities. The economic school argues that crime is a result of
economic factors, such as economic inequality, deprivation, and lack of
access to resources.

Key Concepts
Economic Disparities: The economic school emphasises the role of
economic disparities and inequalities in shaping individuals’ behaviour
and their propensity to commit crimes. It highlights how economic
inequality can contribute to crime by creating a sense of deprivation,
frustration, and lack of opportunities.

Poverty and Unemployment: The economic school examines how

poverty and unemployment can contribute to crime by creating economic
hardships and a lack of legitimate means of livelihood. It focuses on how
individuals may turn to criminal activities as a means of survival or to fulfil
their economic needs.

Lack of Opportunities: The economic school recognises the importance

of access to resources and opportunities in influencing individuals’
behaviour. It highlights how a lack of access to education, employment,
and social resources can contribute to crime by limiting individuals’
choices and opportunities in life.

Relevant Provisions
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act
(MGNREGA), 2005: This legislation, which is aimed at providing
employment opportunities and improving livelihoods in rural areas,
reflects the economic school’s emphasis on addressing poverty and
unemployment as factors contributing to crime. It provides for guaranteed
employment and wage opportunities for rural households, aiming to
reduce economic disparities and create legitimate means of livelihood.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) provisions under the

Companies Act, 2013: These provisions require certain companies to
contribute towards social and economic development activities, reflecting
the economic school’s emphasis on addressing economic inequalities and
lack of opportunities. It encourages companies to engage in socially
responsible practices, such as poverty alleviation, education, and
employment generation.
Contribution
The economic school of criminology has contributed to the understanding
of crime and criminal behaviour in India by highlighting the role of
economic factors in shaping individuals’ behaviour. It has influenced the
development of policies and programs aimed at addressing economic
disparities, promoting employment opportunities, and reducing poverty as
a means of crime prevention.

Critical Criminology
There is one of the schools of criminology that examines crime and
criminal justice from a critical perspective, focusing on the social,
economic, and political inequalities that contribute to crime and criminal
behaviour. This is the Critical Criminology. It challenges the traditional
theories of criminology and argues that crime is a result of structural
inequalities, power imbalances, and social injustices.

Key Concepts
Structural Inequalities: Critical criminology emphasises the role of
structural inequalities, such as class, race, gender, and ethnicity, in
shaping individuals’ behaviour and their propensity to commit crimes. It
highlights how unequal social, economic, and political systems can
contribute to crime and criminal behaviour.

Power Imbalances: Critical criminology examines how power

imbalances and social injustices can influence crime and criminal justice.
It focuses on how individuals with power and privilege can perpetrate
crimes and escape accountability, while those who are marginalised and
disadvantaged may be more likely to be targeted by the criminal justice
system.

Social Justice: Critical criminology promotes the concept of social justice

and advocates for policies and practices that address social inequalities
and promote equity and fairness. It emphasises the need to tackle root
causes of crime, such as poverty, discrimination, and oppression, to
create a just and inclusive society.

Relevant Provisions
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989: This legislation reflects the critical criminology perspective by
addressing social inequalities based on caste and tribe, and providing for
special provisions for the protection of marginalised communities from
atrocities and discrimination.

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: This

legislation recognises the power imbalances within the domestic sphere
and provides for measures to protect women from domestic violence,
reflecting the critical criminology perspective on gender-based violence
and inequality.
Right to Education Act, 2009: This legislation emphasises the
importance of education as a means of addressing social inequalities and
promoting social justice. It provides for free and compulsory education for
children, with a focus on inclusivity and ensuring equal opportunities for
all.

Contribution
Critical criminology has contributed to the understanding of crime and
criminal behaviour in India by highlighting the social, economic, and
political factors that contribute to crime and criminal justice disparities. It
has influenced the development of policies and programs aimed at
addressing structural inequalities, promoting social justice, and
advocating for the rights of marginalised and disadvantaged communities.

PENOLOGY :-

Penology is a multi-disciplinary subject that aims for the study and evaluation
of the application of penal laws onto the wrongdoers. It broadly explains the
justification, characteristics, and effectiveness of punishment in its various
forms. In other words, it is a systematic study of different facets of
punishment and its impact on crimes, criminals, and society. As a matter of
fact, penology owes its origin to Cesare Beccaria, the classical school of
criminology. This Italian criminologist argued that justification of punishment
must be to deter potential criminals, and not merely to punish the offender.
Later, it was during the end of the 19th century that different theories of
punishment were propounded focusing on the aims and objectives of the
punishment.

The scope of penology is vast and hence it becomes difficult to define the
same. Penology is almost seen in every aspect and type of punishment for
the crimes and offences. To limit the scope we have to study basically all the
aspects of penology, where all the things are explained in their wider senses.

SANTA SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB

Types Of Penology
Penology is broadly classified into different categories:

1. Retributive penology is based on the principle that offenders

should be punished for their crimes in a way that is proportional to
the harm they have caused. This branch focuses on punishment as a
means of retribution and deterrence.
2. Rehabilitative penology is based on the principle that offenders
can be rehabilitated and reintegrated into society. This approach
emphasizes treatment and education to help offenders overcome
the factors that contributed to their criminal behaviour.
3. Restorative penology is based on the principle that the criminal
justice system should focus on repairing the harm caused by crime
and restoring relationships between offenders, victims, and their
communities. This approach emphasizes community involvement
and mediation.
4. Critical penology is based on the principle that the criminal justice
system is a product of social, economic, and political forces that
perpetuate inequality and oppression. This approach emphasizes
the need to challenge and reform the criminal justice system to
address underlying issues of power and social justice.
5. Comparative penology is the study of the differences and
similarities in criminal justice systems and correctional practices in
different countries and cultures. This approach emphasizes the need
to understand and learn from other systems to develop more
effective and humane policies and practices.

Importance of Penology
Penology plays a critical role in the criminal justice system.

 It helps to ensure that offenders are punished in a manner that is

consistent with the law and ethical principles.
 It also plays a role in deterring crime and protecting society by
imposing sanctions on offenders.
 Additionally, it has a significant impact on the lives of offenders, as
it can determine their future prospects and rehabilitation.
 Scope of Penology

Penology is the study of punishment and corrections. It is a branch of

sociology that examines the effects of crime and justice systems on society.
Penologists may work in prisons, jails, court systems, and other law
enforcement agencies.

Penology has many different goals, including deterrence, rehabilitation,

retribution, and incapacitation. These goals often conflict with one another,
and penologists must make difficult decisions about the best way to punish
criminals.
The field of penology is constantly changing, as researchers learn more about
crime and justice systems. New technologies have led to new methods of
punishment and rehabilitation, and penologists must keep up with these
changes in order to provide the best possible service to society.

THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT :-
Punishment is the most prominent feature of criminal law. Every society has
its own way of social control for which it frames certain laws and also
mentions the deterrents attached to them. Punishment is the consequence of
an unpleasant act that the wrongdoer commits. Simply put, the fundamental
aim of punishment is to give relief to the aggrieved party and to maintain law
and order in society. Punishment can also be termed as the imposition of
some form of deprivation by withholding rights that a person is legally
entitled to. This article aims to bring to its readers a simple explanation of the
theories of punishment that helps the criminal justice system function from
time to time.

Objects of punishment
1. To protect society from mischievous elements by deterring potential
offenders.
2. To prevent actual offenders from committing further offences.
3. To eradicate evils and reform criminals and turn them into law-
abiding citizens.
4. To administrate justice partly by inflicting pain to deter criminals and
others from indulging in crime and partly by reforming criminals.
5. To maintain rules and regulations for a crime-free country.
Theories of punishment generally contain policies regarding the handling of
crimes and criminals. The theory of punishment deals with the principles on
the basis of which punishment is to be given to the offender, with the object
of safeguarding a society deprived of law and order. There are four types of
theories of punishment.

1. Deterrent theory.
2. Retributive theory.
3. Preventive theory.
4. Reformative theory.
Deterrent theory of punishment
The founder of this theory is Jeremy Benrhem, and this theory is based on
the principle of hedonism which says that a man would be deterred from
committing a crime if the punishment applied was swift, certain, and severe.

This theory focuses on deterring offenders from criminality or repeating the

same crime in the future. This theory is a lesson to members of society who
experience the consequences of that crime. It creates fear of punishment in
like-minded people.

There should be a nexus between the crime committed and the punishment
inflicted for that. While deciding on the punishment, the following should be
taken into consideration;

1) The seriousness of the crime – Punishment should be given according

to the seriousness of the crime committed, for e.g one can’t award a death
sentence for pickpocketing.

2) The gravity of crime – The consequences of the punishment inflicted

have to be taken into consideration alongside taking into account the victim’s
satisfaction concerning the same. For e.g, if Mr.X is murdered by Mr.Y then if
Mr.Y is giving one-time compensation of Rs.5 lakhs to X’s family, is it
sufficient if he is the only bread earner of the family?

3) Impact on the general public – It is most important to consider what

will be the effect of that punishment in the minds of the general public. Are
they taking lessons from that? For example, traffic police are collecting fines
for not wearing helmets, but do people follow this rule? Are they really
serious about fines and rules?

In the case of the State of H.P.v. Nirmala Devi (2017), the court of law had
opined that if the crime done is heinous and serious against society then the
deterrent theory becomes more relevant, for those guilty will be punished to
deter other prospective offenders.

Criticism of deterrence theory

1. Though this theory intends to deter people from committing crimes
or repeating the same crime, it has failed to serve its purpose. It has
proved ineffective in checking crimes and the fact that excessive
harshness of punishment tends to defeat its purpose by arousing the
public’s sympathy towards those who are subjected to such
punishment.
2. Punishment loses its essence once the criminal is punished. For
example, in the Delhi gang rape case, familiarly known as
 the Nirbhaya case, all 4 accused were hanged for their heinous
crime but the offence of rape continues to happen. Thus the
question as to whether the deterrent theory of punishment serves its
purpose remains arising in people’s minds.
3. It does not give a chance to reform the accused.

Retributive theory of punishment

This theory is based on the famous saying that a ‘Tit for Tat’, ‘ Eye for Eye’
or’ Teeth for Teeth’. The main motive of this theory is to inflict a similar
amount of pain endured by the aggrieved party because of the offender’s
activity. Put simply, it can be said that every punishment is retributive to a
certain extent for the purpose of punishment itself is to restore peace and
harmony in society. This theory is harsher than other theories.

Owing to humanitarian grounds, this theory of punishment is not much on the

favourable side for it causes harm to the accused in a greater way. Therefore,
the most important thing to consider while awarding punishment is the
balance between the aggravating and the mitigating factors involved in the
offence committed.

Criticism of the retributive theory

As per the development of society, this type of punishment was banned due
to the following criticism.

1. It is difficult to determine the proportion of pain or revenge in this

type of punishment, meaning to what and to what extent the pain
should be returned.
2. The entire natural justice principle will collapse if everyone takes
revenge on each other according to their hate and the injury caused.

Preventive theory of punishment

Unlike other theories, this theory aims to prevent crime rather than take
revenge. This theory is also called the disablement theory. Put simply, we can
understand the nature of this theory with a simple example: when we were in
school, our teachers used to make the mischievous students stand out of the
classroom, for disturbing the whole class. This punishment by the teacher
prevents other students from disturbing the class due to fear of punishment.
In the same way, this theory talks about eliminating the accused from society
to prevent the repetition of his crime again. By preventing those criminals,
society protects itself against anti-social order in general. Prevention of these
criminals can be done by giving them death punishment or life imprisonment.
Separation of these criminals from society prevents other prospective
offenders from committing crimes.

Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration

Reformative theory of punishment

The name of this theory itself implies what its nature has to say. This theory
helps to reform criminals, thereby transforming them into law-abiding
citizens. Nobody is indeed a criminal by birth, crimes sometimes happen
accidentally or situationally. In this case, the offender should get another
chance to rectify his mistake. For this, there is the facility of correctional
homes, juvenile homes, training schools, and reformatories. The main object
of this theory is the rehabilitation of inmates.

Dharambir v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Criticism surrounding the reformative theory of

punishment
1. This theory only works for juvenile and first-time offenders and not
for hardened criminals who have committed multiple crimes.
2. The reformative theory of punishment is sometimes considered not
justifiable for the aggrieved party subjected to prejudice by the
offender.
3. The term ‘capital’ is derived from the Latin word ‘capitalis’, which
means concerning the head. Thus, to be subjected to capital
punishment means to lose one’s head.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT :- What is Victimology?

The term “Victimology” was first used by French lawyer Benjamin
Mendelsohn in the year 1947.[2] Victimology is the study of a crime from the
point of view of the victim or the sufferer. A varied view exists as to what
should come under the concept of Victimology. Some people are of the view
that victimology is a subfield of Criminology itself. Another view is that
victimology should be considered as a separate field of inquiry, independent
in itself. One more question which is posed now and again is, what is the
scope of victimology and how many victim related concepts can be placed
under victimology. Some people are of the view that only the relationship
between a victim and the offender should fall within the scope of victimology.
Others believe that apart from the relationship between the victim and the
offender, concepts like needs of the victim, the function of the institution
which respond to these needs and the role of a victim should also fall within
the purview of victimology. One more issue which has not been given the
attention it deserves is the breadth of the definition of term “victim.” One
approach is to limit the definition to victims of only traditional crimes like
rape, murder, robbery, etc. Others believe that since the field is specifically
focusing towards the victims, the definition should be broader which even
covers various groups like immigrants, prisoners, people who are charged
with a crime but proved guilty, prisoners, etc.

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is the execution

of a criminal who has been sentenced to death by a court of law for a
serious felony. It is known as the most severe form of punishment. It
serves as punishment for the most heinous, grievous, and abhorrent
crimes against humanity. Even though the definition and scope of such
crimes vary by nation, state, and age, the death penalty has always
been the result of such crimes.

According to Viano, there are several terms which are related to the victims
and as a whole to victimology.[3]

 Victimhood- the state of being a victim

 Victimization- the action of victimizing a person
 Victimizer- the offender or the person who victimizes other
As victimology is the relation between the offender and the victim, there can
be two major sub-areas in the field of victimology.

 The first is based on the nature of the relationship between the

victim and the offender and it relates to the scientific study criminal
behavior.
 The other sub-area deals majorly with the role of the system of
compensation and restitution to the victim.

Scope of Victimology
Shinder, 1982– “…it investigates the relationship between the offender and
the victim in crime causation. It deals with the process of victimization, of
becoming a victim, and in this context directs much of its attention to the
problem victim-offender, sequence, i.e., the question of whether or not
victimization can have criminogenic effects or can encourage crime”

1. The General Classes of Victims

 The Young
  The Female
 The Old
 The Mentally Defective
 Immigrants, Minorities, and Dull Normals

2. The Psychological Types of Victims

 The Depressed
 The Acquisitive
 The Wanton
 The Lonesome and the Heartbroken
 The Tormentor
 The Blocked, Exempted and Fighting

3. The Activating Sufferer:

When the victims are themselves responsible for their victimization due to
reasons such as certain dispositions, age, alcohol, age, loss of self-confidence
etc operates as an activator on the victim.

Types OF VICTIMS
1. Elderly victims: Abuse, neglect and financial exploitation of elders
by their family members and others are very common these days,
forms a base for victimization. Such victimization can be in the form
of physical, emotional. Neglectful, financial, sexual and self-neglect.
In order to protect and mitigate them, certain laws have been made
such as The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens
Act, 2007.
2. Child victims: Lack of mental maturity, physical strength and
gullible nature make them highly dependent on others and
vulnerable. There is a need to separately address and deal with
them because once they are subject to any kind of cruelty, it will
leave a deep mark on them for a lifetime if not mitigated on time.
That is why they require separate treatment from elders. The
juvenile laws made for children are specifically child-centric and
child-friendly like Prevention of Child Abuse and Victim Protection,
juvenile justice act 2015, human trafficking and child exploitation
prevention act etc. Parliament had also made a national commission
for the protection of child rights in the year 2007 to ensure that all
legislative and administrative policies are laid according to the rights
of children mentioned in Indian Constitution and the UN convention
of child rights.
3. Victims of sex offences: The most common type of victimization
prevalent in our society is on the grounds of sexual pleasure, mostly
women are targetted to such kind of victimization. Offences like
rape, marital rapes, sexual assault, outraging the modesty of
women, stalking and many more comes under its ambit. These
sexual offences have psychological, emotional and physical effects
on victims, it takes time to overcome these effects because of the
such as depression, flashbacks, anxiety, self-harm, substance abuse,
STDs, suicidal tendencies to name a few.
4. Female victims: Nothing victimizes women more than a patriarchal
society and gender disparity. Apart from sexual exploitation, there is
offence like disparity in wages, maternity leave, the ill-treatment to
women in homes, dowry, discrimination in the workplace and many
more still prevalent in our modern society due to its patriarchal
structure that is why there is a need to protect women and give
them special treatment. The National Commission for Women in
India is the apex body that works for protecting and promoting the
interests and rights of women. Similar Commissions have also been
established in most of the states in India. These Commissions were
constituted under the National Commission for Women Act, 1990. It
spreads awareness among women and about women rights, ensures
justice to them, paves the way for their right to life with dignity etc.
5. Minority groups and weaker sections: India being a hub to
multilingualism, multiculturalism and biggest democracy in the
world, have given a way to socio-economic disparity among them.
Such disparity has lead to majority and minority group, economically
weak and economically strong group and socially weak and socially
strong group. Consequently, of the weaker sections of the society by
the stronger one is not a shock-horror and will lead to denial and
infringement of rights. Therefore, it is quintessential that laws should
be made in order to protect these people and their rights. The
National Commission for Scheduled Castes in India looks into the
implementation of legislation like the Protection of Civil Rights Act,
1955 and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Protection Of
Atrocities) Act, 1989. It aims at ensuring socio-economic
development and protection of the Scheduled Castes from
victimization. Similarly, as per the Constitutional mandate, the
National Commission for Scheduled Tribes looks into the affairs
related to the scheduled tribes and strives to prevent their
exploitation and assure their upliftment. The National Commission
for Minorities takes care of the interests of the minority of the
country. It was set up under the National Commission for Minorities
Act, 1992 and Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists and
Zoroastrians (Parsis) have been notified by the Central Government
as minorities.
RIGHTS OF VICTIMS :-

Ensuring access to justice and fair treatment, compensation/restitution and

providing the required assistance to the victim are some of the rights that
should be given to the victim without any default in any criminal justice
system. These sacred elements have been given recognition in the Indian
criminal justice system too.

Access to justice and fair treatment

Looking at the provisions of law, one can easily make out that criminal justice
is more tilted towards ensuring the protection of the accused. The main
attention of the State is to hear him out and if his guilt is proved then take all
measures to ensure that he does not go unpunished. We can find various
provisions like section 56 and section 76 of CrPC that make it mandatory for
the accused to be presented before a judicial magistrate within 24 hours of
arrest without any delay shield the accused from unnecessary harassment.
However, concerning the victim, the rights are not well codified under the
Indian criminal justice system.

Despite the tilt towards the accused, there are still provisions granting rights
on the victim which help in eliminating further victimization. Section 439
provides that before granting bail to the accused the victim has to be
informed unless for cogent reasons court thinks it would not be practicable to
inform him. Furthermore, by the virtue of section 439(2), the victim can also
appeal against the bail granted to the accused. This provision ensures that
the accused is not eased out without the knowledge of the victim. When a
crime happens, it is treated not just as a crime against the individual but as a
crime against society. Therefore, State is the prosecutor in such cases and a
Public Prosecutor or an Assistant Public Prosecutor is in charge of the case. In
case the victim wants to engage any pleader then he can do so. Such a
leader has to act under the direction of the Public Prosecutor or the Assistant
Public Prosecutor. Section 154 of the Code prescribes the procedure for
lodging the first information report (F.I.R). As per this section, the victim can
either give information relating to the commission of the cognizable offence
in writing or orally to the officer in charge of the police station who shall then
reduce it to writing. In case the officer in charge of the police station refuses
to take down the information then the victim can the substance of such
information to the Superintendent of Police who can either conduct the
investigation himself or ask any of his subordinates to do the same. It has
been a much-debated question whether lodging FIR is mandatory or if there
is discretion upon the officer in charge of the police station. This issue has
been resolved in the case of Lalita Kumari v Government of U. P. where it was
held that section 154 of the Code is a mandatory provision and in case a
person comes with the information of a cognizable offence then the officer in
charge of the police station is bound to register the FIR. This mandatory
nature of the provision ensures that it is easy and swift access to justice for
the victim, judicial oversight and it also reduces the chances of manipulation
in criminal cases.

Even in cases of plea bargaining, the opinion of the victim in granting it is

considered. Plea bargaining is basically a negotiation between the accused
and the prosecution for a lesser punishment. The outcome of plea bargaining
is based on mutual satisfaction and it may even involve payment by the
accused to the victim for the expenses he had incurred. This provision is
based on fairness.

Compensation/restitution
It has been a topic of much debate and discussion whether the baton of the
justice givers ends at the final result of the case, i.e., merely punishing the
wrongdoer or does it extends to ensuring that the aggrieved party is
rehabilitated. Rehabilitation of the victim becomes even more essential in
certain grave crimes like rape etc. and without providing a proper mechanism
for rehabilitation the whole criminal justice system would fall shallow. The
true idea of justice can only be achieved when there are not just punitive
measures for the wrong-doer but also providing rehabilitative measures for
the ones who fall prey to such wrongful acts. The fines and other
punishments are given to the accused by the court are punitive measures.
The criminal courts have to deal with the punitive part and punish the
offender for his wrongful acts, whereas, the civil court has to get the victim
compensated by the accused. Along with the punitive measure, the criminal
court may also allow compensation to the crime victim that can be done
without causing any disturbance to the civil and criminal process and would
also save time, money and efforts. The provision related to compensation is
encapsulated under section 357 of CrPC. However, compensation under this
section can only be provided if the accused has been convicted and
sentenced. While deciding the compensation the court will look into both
physical and financial loss caused to the accused. If the court orders a
sentence of fine or any other sentence of which a fine is a part then the
maximum compensation that can be given, as per section 357(1) is the
maximum fine that can be imposed as compensation as to be given out of
the fine so imposed. Furthermore, section 357(3) can be construed liberally
as it allows compensation only in cases where a fine is not imposed. The
object of sub-clause 3 of section 357 is to allow compensation in those cases
where fine does not form a part of the punishment given.

There are several case laws where the courts have ordered compensation to
the victim in case the State or its functionaries were unable to protect the
life, liberty or dignity of such a victim. The provision for victim compensation
was introduced in CrPC in 2009 by adding section 357A which mandated the
State Government to coordinate with the Central Government and prepare a
scheme fund for victim compensation. It provides that where the trial court
feels that the compensation awarded or in those cases where the accused
has been discharged or acquitted then compensation can be awarded to the
victim for his rehabilitation. Clause 2 of section 357A provides that the where
the court makes a recommendation for compensation the State Legal
Services Authority (hereinafter SLSA) or the District Legal Services Authority
(hereinafter DLSA) has to decide the quantum of punishment that has to be
given. There can even be cases where the offender cannot be identified. In
such cases, the Code provides relief to the victim or his dependents who can
make write an application for such compensation from SLSA or DLSA who
shall then conduct an enquiry within 2 months and if satisfied award
adequate compensation.

The court has time and again held that section 357 regarding compensation
should be construed liberally and the court should record its reason for
allowing or not allowing the same.

Victim’s rights in different countries

While making sure that the accused does not suffer unnecessarily it is
equally, important to secure certain rights for the already harassed victim in
order to make the process of justice-seeking smooth. Although India such
special attention to the victim lacks, however, their are several countries
making progress in this regard. In England, the Code of Practice for Victims of
Crime in England and Wales lays down various rights which have to be given
to a crime victim. It gives the victim the right to be referred to the services
that support the victim and his needs. The victim also has a right to make
Victim’s Personal Statement in the court wherein the victim tells the court
how the crime has affected him and the court considers his statement while
passing the order. This right gives the victim the chance to put forth his
opinion. The victim is not just involved in the process while the trial happens
but even after the conviction is done. The victim has a right to be informed
about the progress of the offender and also if the court considers his parole
or release. Furthermore, in order to make these rights effective, the victim
also has the right to get his above-mentioned rights enforced.

Provision Regarding Compensation to Victims :-

Laws governing compensation of victims of

crime in India
 The provisions relating to compensation to victims of crime are
contained in sections 357, 357(1), 357 (2), 357 (3), 357A, 358, 359
and 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
 Constitution of India also provides for certain safeguards to
the victim of crime. Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution supports
the argument.
 Victim compensation under The Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973

WHERE CONVICTION AND FINE IS

PART OF THE SENTENCE
When an accused is proven guilty, and the court passes an order which
contains a fine of any denomination, the court can order such fine or any part
of it to be paid to the victim of crime. The fine imposed is utilised to
compensate the victim of fine in the following ways.

#1 Compensating for the expenses incurred

during litigation (357 1 a)
 This is the essential relief which a victim of a crime must get.
Litigation costs in India are very arbitrary. The lawyer charges hefty
amount. Getting justice at times adds to the burden of the victim
itself. Instead of getting justice, the victim is trapped in the
honeycomb of justice delivery system.
 The court knows this fact and thus, compensate victim by providing
them the expenses incurred during litigation.

#2 Compensation for loss or injury to be

recovered by the civil court
 If the court is of the view that, the compensation sought is beyond
the jurisdiction of the court, the court itself orders the appropriate
court to look into the matter.
 In the payment to any person of compensation for any loss or injury
caused by the offence, when compensation is, in the opinion of the
Court, recoverable by such person in a Civil Court.

#3 Compensation in case of death

 One might question the fact that, who is the victim where death has
been caused? As the victim is already dead, who should be
compensated for the crime?
 It is the family of the victim. Think of the mental trauma they might
have gone through. Medical expenses incurred, expenses during last
rites. What if the victim who died was the sole bread earner of the
family?
  The Court is well aware of such situation. Therefore, the legislature
and the judiciary tied their hands to do complete justice.
 Victims are entitled to recover damages from the person sentenced
for the loss resulting to them from such death. When any person is
convicted of any offence for having caused the lives of another
person or of having abetted the commission of such a crime.

#4 Compensation of victim of crime in offences

like theft, cheating, criminal breach of
trust, etc
In cases of crime such as theft, cheating, criminal breach of trust, criminal
misappropriation, the Court either tries for recovery of goods and in the case
where recovery is not possible court orders for compensation for the price of
such goods.

COMPENSATION WHERE FINE IS NOT

A PART OF THE SENTENCE
The accused person in such case may be ordered by the court to pay a
certain sum as compensation to the victim of crime who suffered loss or
injury. Indian legal system is victim friendly. Victim’s rights are kept at the
top of the priority list.

When a Court imposes a sentence, of which fine does not form a part, the
Court may, when passing judgment, order the accused person to pay, by way
of compensation, such amount as may be specified in the order to the person
who has suffered any loss or injury by reason of the act for which the
accused person has been so sentenced.

UNDER PROBATION OF OFFENDER ACT

Under Section 5(1) of the probation of offender act contains provision
regarding compensatory claim. As stated in this section, the court directs
the release of a wrongdoer under section 3 & 4 of the Act, if it is deemed
fit , it may further direct the accused to further pay to the victim the
amount, as the court deems fit and the cost of the procedure .
UNDER MOTOR VEHICLE ACT
Section 164 states that if a person is seriously hurt, or dies due to an accident caused by a
motor vehicle, the owner or insurer of that vehicle has to pay compensation. The
compensation amount is 5 lakh rupees in case of death, or 2.5 lakh rupees in case of
grievous hurt. The compensation can be paid to the victim or the victim’s legal successors
(usually the family members of the victim).

Compensatory Jurisprudence
"While studying the biological, sociological, psychological, and criminological details
about the victim - victimology brings into focus the victim-offender relationship and
role played by victim." - Fattah

Compensation to victims is a recognised principle of law being enforced through the

ordinary civil courts. Under the law of torts the victims can claim compensation for
the injury to the person or property suffered by them. It is taking decades for the
victims to get a decree for damages or compensation through civil courts, which is
resulting in so much hardship to them. The emergence of compensatory
jurisprudence in the light of human rights philosophy is a positive signal indicating
that the judiciary has undertaken the task of protecting the right to life and personal
liberty of all the people irrespective of the absence of any express constitutional
provision and of judicial precedents.

Article 32 of the Constitution of India confers power on the Supreme Court to issue
direction or order or writ, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus,
prohibition, quo-warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the
enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution. The right to
move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the
rights conferred by Part III is "guaranteed", that is to say, the right to move the
Supreme Court under Article 32 for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by
Part III of the Constitution is itself a fundamental right.

The approach of redressing the wrong by award of monetary compensation against

the State for its failure to protect the fundamental right of the citizen has been
adopted by the courts of Ireland, which has a written Constitution, guaranteeing
fundamental rights, but which also like the Indian Constitution contains no provision
of remedy of compensation for the infringement of those rights. That has, however,
not prevented the courts in Ireland from developing remedies, including the award of
damages, not only against individuals guilty of infringement, but also against the
State itself.