ABSTRACT

NAME OF THE PROJECT: “SCHOOLS OF CRIMINOLOGY”-

THEORIES AND CAUSES OF CRIME.

SUBJECT: SOCIOLOGY

INTRODUCTION:

Human thinking in those days was predominated by religious mysticism and all
human relations were regulated through myths, superstitious and religious tenets
prevailing in a particular society. This in other words, meant that little attention
was devoted to the motive, environment and psychology of the offender in the
causation of crime. Thereafter with the change in human thinking and evolution of
modern society, certain social reformers took up the cause of criminals and
devoted their attention to analysis of crime causation. This finally led to the
emergence of criminology as a branch of knowledge through development of
different schools of criminology.

Sutherland pointed out that it connotes the system of thought which consists of an
integrated theory of causation of crime and of policies of control implied in the
theory of causation. The adherents of each school try to explain the causation of
crime and criminal behavior in their own way relying on the theory propounded by
the exponent of that particular school. Therefore, evident that each school of
criminology explains crime in its own manner and suggests punishment and
preventive measures to suit its ideology. The scientific explanations of criminal
behavior are stated in the form of different theories, known as various “schools of
criminology”.

RESEARCH QUESTION:

 Whether there is co-relative variation in crime rate to changes in social

organization.

 Whether the criminality should be corrected through persuasive methods

rather than traditional punitive methods.
 What can we do to prevent crime?
REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

The researcher has taken information from various books and website, journals.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

The researcher has opted for doctrinal method of study.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

The scope of this study is limited to connecting criminological theory and social
policy.

IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES:

Independent variable:

Dependent variable:

HYPOTHESIS:

Theories of crime causation imply that changing the conditions the theory holds
responsible for causing crime can reduce it and even prevent it. Policy: A course
of action designed to solve some problem that has been selected from among
alternative courses of action. Every theory has policy implications deducible from
its primary assumptions and propositions. A good theory should offer useful
practical recommendation.
 CHAPTERIZATION:

1. INTRODUCTION :

CHALLENGES TO UNDERSTANDING THEORY GROWTH IN CRIMINOLOGY

METHODS AND IMPORTANCE OF CRIMINOLOGY

2. BRIEF HISTORY OF THEROY BUILDING IN CRIMINOLOGY

3. OBJECTIVE OF CRIMINOLOGY
4. REASONS AND IMPORTANCE FOR STUDYING CRIMINOLOGY
5. VARIOUS SCHOOLS OF CRIMINOLOGY/THEORIES OF CRIME AND
CAUSATION.
 THE PRE-CLASSICAL THEORY
 NATURALISTIC SCHOOL
 THE CLASSICAL OF CRIMINOLOGY
 C.S: CESARE BECCARIA & REFORM
 JERMY BENTHAM & HUMAN NATURE
 THE LEGACY OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL
 STRENGHTHS AND CRITICISM
 THE NEO-CLASSICAL THEORY
 POSITIVE SCHOOL
 CESARE LOMBROSO
 APPRAISAL OF THE POSITIVE SCHOOL
 ECOLOGICAL SCHOOL
 SOCIAL DISORGANISATION
 THE DIFFERNTIAL THEORY
 SOCIOLOGICAL SCHOOL
 THE CLINICAL SCHOOL
6. CONTROL THEORY OF CRIME
7. SOCIETY ATTMEPT TO CONTROL CRIME
8. MULTI CAUSATION THEORY OF CRIME
9. CAUSES OF CRIME
10. OTHER FACTORS
INTRODUCTION:

The formal study of criminology began with Cesare Beccaria, an Italian jurist who
adopted a systematic approach to crime and criminals at the end of the 18th
century. He was the first person to study crime scientifically. The statement made
in his treatise, "On Crimes and Punishments," helped eliminate the corrupt and
inhuman practices of the administration of criminal law at that time.

One of the most important questions in criminology, or the study of crime and
punishment, asks why people commit crimes. Many criminological theories are
rooted in certain schools of thought, which help explain criminal behavior and
allow the criminal justice system to receive appropriate punishment. The current
US criminal justice system is based on the interaction between the main
criminology schools.

Some of the prominent schools of criminology are has under:

1. Pre-Classical school
2. Classical school
3. Neo-classical school
4. Positive school
5. Sociological school
6. Clinical school
7. Control theory of crime
HISTORY OF CRIMINOLOGY:

Criminology developed in the late 18th century, when various movements, imbued
with humanitarianism, questioned the cruelty, arbitrariness, and inefficiency of the
criminal justice and prison systems. During this period reformers such
as CesareBeccaria in Italy and Sir Samuel Romilly, John Howard, and Jeremy
Bentham in England, all representing the so-called classical school of criminology,
sought penological and legal reform rather than criminological knowledge. Their
principal aims were to mitigate legal penalties, to compel judges to observe the
principle of nullapoena sine lege (Latin: “due process of law”), to reduce the
application of capital punishment, and to humanize penal institutions. They were
moderately successful, but, in their desire to make criminal justice more “just,”
they tried to construct rather abstract and artificial equations between crimes and
penalties, ignoring the personal characteristics and needs of the individual criminal
defendant. Moreover, the object of punishment was primarily retribution and
secondarily deterrence, with reformation lagging far behind.

In the early 19th century the first annual national crime statistics were published in
France. Adolphe Quetelet (1796–1874), a Belgian mathematician, statistician, and
sociologist who was among the first to analyze these statistics, found considerable
regularity in them (e.g., in the number of people accused of crimes each year, the
number convicted, the ratio of men to women, and the distribution of offenders by
age). From these patterns he concluded that “there must be an order to those things
which are reproduced with astonishing constancy, and always in the same way.”
Later, Quetelet argued that criminal behavior was the result of society’s structure,
maintaining that society “prepares the crime, and the guilty are only the
instruments by which it is executed.”

Whereas Quetelet focused on the characteristics of societies and attempted to

explain their resulting crime rates, the Italian medical doctor Cesare
Lombroso (1836–1909) studied individual criminals in order to determine why
they committed crimes. Some of his investigations led him to conclude that people
with certain cranial, skeletal, and neurological malformations were “born criminal”
because they were biological throwbacks to an earlier evolutionary stage. Highly
controversial at the time he presented it; his theory was ultimately rejected by
social scientists. Lombroso also contended that there were multiple causes of crime
and that most offenders were not born criminal but instead was shaped by their
environment. The research of both Quetelet and Lombroso emphasized the search
for the causes of crime—a focus that criminology has retained.

OBJECTIVE OF CRIMINOLOGY:
The main purpose of criminology is to study the sequence of the creation of the
law, the violation of the law and the reaction to the violation of the law from the
point of view of the effectiveness of the law as a measure of crime control. It
focuses on the causality of crime, various factors that lead a person to crime and
the prevention of crime and criminals. It is a field of study, related to a variety of
branches of social sciences such as sociology, economics, biology, psychology,
topography, political configuration, statistics, etc., and therefore, essentially of a
nature interdisciplinary The ultimate goal of criminological studies is "to stop
criminality within the human being through the effective administration of criminal
justice and not humanity within the criminal."1

1
.Gillin J.L. Criminilogy & penology(3 rd Ed)p.14
 THE REASONS FOR STUDYING CRIMINOLOGY:

Therefore, the reasons for the study of criminology must be clear. It is true that
science is widely studied by itself, like other sciences, crime and criminals are not
a little less interesting than stars or microbes.
But this point of view is secondary compared to the practical aspect, as in the case
of medical science. In fact, the comparison with the latter is suggested repeatedly.
Criminology must, above all, show humanity how to fight, and especially, prevent
crime. What is required more than anything else is solid knowledge, while up to
the present we have had too much dogma and dilettantism. Whoever is in close
contact with what is called socio pathological phenomena should take note of these
especially criminal jurists, whose knowledge of the law must be complemented
imperatively with the issue that should be addressed.2

IMPORTANCE OF CRIMINOLOGY:
I. The most significant purpose of criminology is its concern for crime and
criminals. There is a basic assumption that no one is born a criminal. (Check out
the Lombroso theory). Reformation is therefore treated as the ultimate object of
punishment while “individualization” i.e. according individualized understanding
and treatment is the preferred method for such reformation.
II. It is important for lawyers(when dealing with criminal clients it helps to
understand their mind set and particular circumstances for purposes of giving
proper legal advice as well as for pursuing a logical line of defense), judicial
officers(for purposes of awarding appropriate sentencing, it is important for a
judicial officer to not only understand the offender, but the society/community’s
perceptions and emotions on given offences), law enforcement officers(for
purposes of investigations, prosecutions, surveillance and crime prevention, for
those holding criminals such as prison officers), social workers, psychologists,
etc to understand the criminal more.
III. It enhances official understanding of criminals, offenders, the types and
prevalence of offences committed, generally or specifically by a class of people
or in certain localities. This kind of understanding supported by data is important
for crime detection and control. The government is enabled to plan better in
terms of allocation of resources towards fighting different types of crimes.
IV. The ultimate object of criminology is to render a crimeless society. (This is of
course a very remote possibility especially considering how crimes are created
and the fact that sometimes very legitimate behavior i.e. change in drinking is
criminalized).
2
Criminology and penology by Prof. Dr. M. Shokry El-Dakkak
VARIOUS SCHOOLS OF CRIMINOLOGY/ THEORIES OF CRIME AND
CAUSATION:

Various scholars have attempted to explain the causation of crime and criminal
behavior. Each school of criminology explains crime in its own manner and
suggests punishment and measures to suit its ideology. Each school represents the
social attitude of people towards crime in a given time.

I.PRE-CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY:

During the period of the seventeenth century, Europe was characterized by a

predominance of religion in state activities. At this stage, scientific knowledge was
still unknown. The concept of crime was vague and obscure. Society at that time
was largely incapable of explaining criminal behavior. Therefore, an explanation
of criminal behavior was sought through spirits, demons and other unknown
powers. The principle behind this concept was that a man commits a crime due to
the influence of some external power and is not subject to man's control or
understanding. As the spiritual world is not easy to understand or discern, it formed
a perfect explanation for the crime.

No further attempts were made to investigate the true cause of the crime. Worship,
sacrifices, trials by fire and water were generally prescribed to pacify the spirit and
relieve the victims of its malign influence. Oaths and hard evidence played a very
important role in the old judicial system to determine the culpability of the
offender. Path by battle was also used as a method to decide the fate of the
criminal. Therefore, the criminal was treated as a person who could only be cured
by torture and pain. However, Pre classic thought has withered over time and the
advance of knowledge.

NATURALISTIC SCHOOL:

The defenders of this school argued that crime should be explained through the use
of ideas and interpretation of objects and events and their interrelation with the
existing world. Therefore, there is no place for other worldly powers or spirits. No
matter how unsatisfactory, the explanation must be based on what is known or
assumed to be true of the physical and material world. This approach is as old as it
is modern.

II. THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL:

In the mid-eighteenth century, Berccaria, the pioneer of modern criminology,
exposed his naturalistic theory of criminality by rejecting the theory proposed by
the pre-classical school. He placed greater emphasis on the free will of the
individual, arguing that intelligence and rationality is the fundamental
characteristics of man and, therefore, the basis for the explanation of human
behavior, whether individual or collective. Therefore, intelligence makes man
capable of self-directing and it will be assumed that the individual has thought and
rationalized any behavior that participates. Within this frame of reference, crime
and criminals are generally seen from a strictly legal point of view that is, the
offense is defined as the commission of any action prohibited by criminal law or
the omission of any act required by it. A criminal is defined as a person who
commits a crime. Crime is seen as the product of the free choice of the individual
who evaluates the potential cost. Therefore, the rational response of society should
be to increase the cost and reduce the benefits of crime to the point that people do
not choose to commit a crime.

It is considered that the task of criminology is to design and test a system of

punishment that results in the minimum occurrence of the crime. Thus, this
prescriptive deals with the question of deterrence.

The main tenets of the classical school of criminology are as follows:

1. Man applies his sense of reasoning as a responsible individual.

2. It is the act of an individual and not his intent which forms the basis for
determining criminality in him. Classical criminologists are therefore concerned
with the “act” of the criminal rather than his “intent”.

3. The classical criminologists are greatly influenced by hedonism-the pain (cost)

and pleasure (benefit) theory. Thus, they accepted punishment as a mode of
inflicting pain, humiliation and disgrace on the offender so as to create fear in him
and thus control his behavior.

4. The proponents of this school of thought considered crime prevention more

important than the punishment for it. They therefore stressed the need for a well-
established system of criminal justice.

5. The classical criminologists supported the right of the state to punish offenders
in the interest of public security. Keeping in view the hedonistic principle of pain
and pleasure they pointed out that individualization was to e the basis of
punishment. The punishment was to be meted out keeping in view the pleasure
derived by the criminal from the crime and the pain caused to the victim there
from. They however advanced the theory of equalization of Justice I.e Equal
punishment for the same offence.

6. The further believed that criminal law was primarily based on positive sanctions.
They were against arbitrary use of power by judges and abhorred torturous
punishments.

The greatest achievement of the classical school is the fact that it shifted emphasis
from myths and concentrated on the personality of the offender in order to
determine his guilt and punishment. In other words, Beccaria was the first
criminologists to shift the emphasis from crime to criminals.

Nonetheless, the classical school has the following shortcomings:

1.Firstly, it proceeded on an abstract presumption of free will and relied solely to

the criminal act without devoting any attention to the state of mind of the criminal.

2.It also erred in prescribing equal punishment for similar offences thus making no
distinction between first offenders and habitual offenders.

THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL: CESARE BECCARIA AND REFORM

 The father of classical criminology is generally considered to be Cesare

Bonesana, Marchese di Beccaria.

 Dei Delitti e della pene (on crimes and punishment) (1764): This book is an
impassioned plea to humanize and rationalize the law and to make
punishment more just and reasonable.

 Beccaria did not question the need for punishment, but he believed that laws
should be designed to preserve public safety and order, not to avenge crime.

 To ensure a rational and fair penal structure, punishments for specific crimes
must be decreed by written criminal codes, and the discretionary powers of
judges severely curtailed.
 JERMY BENTHAM AND HUMAN NATURE:

 A principle of morals and legislation (1789) is a philosophy of social control

based on the principle of utility, which prescribed “the greatest happiness for
the greatest number”.

 Any human action at all should be judged moral or immoral by its effect on
the happiness is the main goal of life. Rational behavior that is consistent
with logic.

 Hedonism and rationality are combined in concept of the hedonistic

calculus, a method by which individuals are assumed to logically weigh the
anticipated benefits of a given course of action against its possible costs.

 Free will enables human beings to purposely ad deliberately chose to follow

a calculated course of action. If crime is to be deterred, punishment (pain)
must exceed the pleasures gained from the fruits of crime.

THE LEGACY OF THE CLASSSICAL SCHOOL:

 All modern criminal justice systems in the world assume the classical
position that persons are free agents who deserve to be punished when they
transgress the law.

 Many of the ideas championed by Beccaria in such rights as freedom form

cruel and unusual punishment, the right to a speedy trail, as freedom from
cruel and unusual punishment, the right to a speedy trail, the prohibition of
ex post facto laws, the right to confront ones accusers and equality under
law, contained in the bill of rights and other documents at the heart of
western legal systems today.

III.NEO-CLASSICAL SCHOOL:

The "free will" theory of the classical school did not survive for a long time due to
the aforementioned oversights. The neo classists affirmed that certain categories of
delinquents, such as minors, idiots, insane or incompetent persons, had to be
treated with indifference, independently of the similarity of their criminal acts with
those of other criminals. This reasoning was based on the argument that such
people are unable or partially unable to distinguish good from evil.
The Neo-classical theory can be summarized as follows:

1. The approached the study of criminology on scientific lines by recognizing

that certain extenuating situations or mental disorders deprive the criminal of
his normal capacity to control his conduct. In so doing they represent a
reaction against the severity of the classical view of equal punishment for
the same offence.

2. They were the first school to point out the distinction between a first
offender and a recidivist.

3. They started on the premise and assumption that man acts on reason of
intelligence and is therefore responsible for his own conduct. But those
lacking normal intelligence or suffering some mental depravity are not
responsible for their conduct as they do not possess the capacity of
distinguishing between good or bad and should therefore be treated
differently from other offenders.

4. Although they recommended lenient treatment for irresponsible or mentally

deprived criminals on account of their incapacity to resist criminal tendency,
they unanimously believed that all criminals whether responsible or
irresponsible must be kept away from society.

5. The distinction between responsibility –sanity and insanity as suggested by

the neo-classical school paved way for the formation of the different
correctional institutions such as parole, probation etc in the criminal justice
system. Through this school therefore attention of criminologists was drawn
to the facts that all crimes have a cause.

6. This school adopted a subjective approach to criminology and concentrated

their attention on conditions under which an individual commits crime.

7. The origin of the jury system and the assessor system is essentially the result
of the reaction of the neo-classical approach towards the treatment of
offenders.

The main shortcoming of the neo-classical school is that their theory presumes that
the criminal whether responsible or irresponsible is a menace to society and
therefore needs to be eliminated from it. Their primary concern is therefore to
protect society from crime and criminals.
IV.POSITIVIST SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY:
At the end of the 19th century, some of the principles on which the classical school
was based began to be questioned by the emergent positivist school in criminology,
directed mainly by three Italian thinkers: Cesare Lombroso, Enrico Ferri and
Raffaele Garofalo. It is for this reason that this school is also called the Italian
school of criminology. It is at this point that the term criminology arose for the first
time, both in the work of the Italian Raffaele Garofalo (criminology) in 1885 and
in the work of the French anthropologist Paul Topinard (criminologist) almost at
the same time.3
In the nineteenth century, certain French doctors managed to establish that it was
not the "free will" of the offender or his innate depravity that prompted him to
commit a crime, but the real cause of crime was in the anthropological
characteristics of the offender. Some phrenologists also tried to demonstrate the
organic functioning of the brain and enthusiastically established a joint relationship
between crime and the structure and functioning of the brain. This led to the
emergence of the positive school of criminology.4

Differentiating criminals from non-criminals the advocates of positive school

attributed criminality to four distinct types namely:

1.Physical criminal type

2. Mental type

3. Psychopath type and

4. socio-economic disadvantaged type.5

The main exponents of this school were three eminent Italian criminologists,
namely, Cesare Lombroso, Raffaele Garofalo and Enrico ferri. It is for this reason
that this school is also called the Italian school of criminology.

3
https://www.open.edu
4
https://www.open.edu
5
Vold G.B. : Theoritical Criminology (oxford Un 1988) P. 33.
CESARE LOMBROSO:

The first attempt to understand the personality of offenders in physical terms was
made by Lombroso of the Italian school of criminology thought who is regarded as
the originator of modern criminology. He was educated in medicine and became a
specialist in psychiatry.
Lombroso adopted an objective and empirical approach to the study of criminals
through his anthropological experiments. After an intensive study of physical
characteristics of his patients and later on of criminals, he came to a definite
conclusion that criminals were physically inferior in the standard of growth and
therefore developed a tendency for inferior acts. He further generalized that
criminals are less sensitive to pain and therefore, they have little regard for the
sufferings of others.6Through his biological and anthropological researchers on
criminals Lombroso justified the involvement of Darwin’s theory of biological
determinism in criminal behaviour.
He classified criminals into three main categories:

1. The Atavists or hereditary criminals:

2. Insane criminals
3. Criminoids

(i)THE ATAVISTS OR HEREDITARY CRIMINALS :

Lombroso also termed them as born-criminals. In his opinion born criminals were
of a distinct type who could not refrain from including in criminality and
environment had no relevance whatsoever to the crimes committed by the Atavists.
He, therefore, considered these criminals as incorrigibles, i.e., beyond reformation.
In this view, offender or the criminal reflected a reversion to an early and more
primitive stage of mankind when individuals were both mentally and physically
inferior. They resembled those of apes and possessed ape-like characteristics.
Lombroso’s theory used physical characteristics as indicators of criminality. He
enumerated as many as sixteen physical abnormalities of a criminal some of which
were peculiar size and shape of head, eye, enlarged jaw and cheek bones. Fleshy
lips, abnormal teeth, and so on.. He revised his theory of atavism in 1906 and held
that only one-third of criminals were born criminals and not all the criminals.

6
Taft : Criminology 4th Ed. P. 64.
Finally, he conceded that his theory of atavism was ill-founded and held that they
were in fact occasional criminals.

Atavistic criminals:

 The atavistic category are those who commit crime due to alcohol or when
they get the opportunity.

Enrico Ferri (1856 – 1929)

He was a student of Lombroso, though he challenged Lombroso’s views on

criminality. Through his research, Ferri proved that mere biological reasons were
not enough to account for criminality. IN his opinion, there were other factors that
influenced crime such as psychological, sociological, economic and emotional
factors. For this reason Ferri is referred to as the founder of criminal sociology.

Ferri described a criminal as an agent of outside forces. During Mussolini’s

regime Ferri prepared a Penal Code for Italy. In it he proposed that for the
reformation, prevention and rehabilitation of criminals the following social needs
had to be considered; free trade, abolition of monopolies, better street lighting,
birth control, freedom of marriage and divorce, public recreation, better economic
conditions of the public, improvement of laws and abolition of certain taxes.
However, Ferri emphasized that punishment is still important for the alleviation of
crime and in some cases useful for reformation.

Ferri classified into criminals into three categories:

1. Insane criminals – inclined to crime due to congenital factors;

2. Born criminals - commit crimes out of impulse, anger, or excessive zeal;
3. Occasional or habitual criminals – influenced by social factors around them
and the need to satisfy certain needs within the social environment;
He categorized the factors that lead to criminal behavior as follows;

 Physical – race, climate, geographical location, seasonal effects,

temperature;
 Anthropological – age, sex, organic and psychological conditions;
 Social – population density, custom, religion, organization of government,
economic and industrial conditions.
Enrico Ferri subsequently challenged Lombroso’s theory of atavism and
demonstrated that it was erroneous to think that criminals were incorrigible. He
believed that just as non-criminals could commit crimes if placed in conducive
circumstances so also the criminals could refrain from criminality in healthy and
crime-free surroundings.

(ii) Insane criminals:

The second category of criminals according to Lombroso consisted of insane

criminals who resorted to criminality on account of certain mental depravity or
disorder.

(iii) Criminoids:

The third category of criminals according to him, was those of criminoids who
were physical terms. He employed scientific methods in explaining criminal
behaviour and shifted the emphasis from crime and criminal. His theory was that
criminals were physically different from normal persons and possessed few
physical characteristics of inferior animal world.

Crimes of Passion:

The third category is those who commit crime in a state of passion or due to
inferiority complex.

AN APPRAISAL OF POSITIVE SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY:

 It rejected the earlier classical theories of spirit and free will;
 It attributed criminality to anthropological, physical and social factors;

 The attention of the criminologist was drawn to the individual, the

personality of the criminal rather than his act – the crime or punishment.
This paved way for modern penology to emphasize individualization as a
method reformation;
 Exponents abandoned the retributive mode of punishment. Reformatory
modes were to be used on different classes of criminals;
 Only those criminals that were incapable of reformation were to be
eliminated;
  While deciding a case a judge should not only consider the law but the
circumstantial conditions of the accused.

In analyzing the causes of crime, Lombroso placed greater emphasis on the

biological nature of human behavior and, therefore, drew criminologists' attention
to the impact of the environment on the cause of crime. However, it must be
affirmed that at a later stage, Lombroso himself became convinced of the
theoretical futility of his theory of atavism and, therefore, extended his theory of
determinism to the social and economic situations of the delinquents. Therefore, he
was positive in the method and in the objective theory of crime on the part of the
proponents of the sociological school of criminology.

It would be seen that the positive school of criminology arose essentially from the
reaction against earlier classic and neoclassical theories. The defenders of this
school completely discarded the theories of the omnipotence of spirit and free will
on the grounds that they were hypothetical and irrational. Alternatively, that
attributes criminality to the physical and social anthropological environment. The
greatest contribution of the positive school to the development of criminal science
lies in the fact that the attention of criminologists focused for the first time on
punishment. This certainly paved the way for modern penologists to formulate a
criminal policy that incorporates the principle of individualization as method and
reform. Thus, the positivists introduced the methodology and logic of the natural
sciences in the field of criminology.

With the predominance of the positive school, the emphasis shifted from penology
to criminology and the objects of punishment were radically modified to the extent
that the methods of retributive methods were totally abandoned. Criminals should
now be treated instead of punished. The protection of society against criminals
should be the main objective that could be achieved by using reformatory methods
for different classes of delinquents to varying degrees. It is in this context that it is
said that the positive school gave birth to a modern sociological or clinical school
that considers the criminal as a byproduct of their conditions and life experience.

The positivists suggested the elimination of only those criminals who did not
respond favorably to extra-institutional methods. The exponents of this school
accepted that there could be extenuating circumstances under which a person could
be forced to commit a crime. Therefore, in addition to considering the crime from
the legal point of view, the judicial authorities must not lose sight of the
circumstantial conditions of the accused while determining their guilt and granting
the punishment. Criminals should be treated as a product of the conditions they
played in their lives, therefore, according to him, the basic purposes of the crime
prevention program should be to eliminate the conditions for crime.

Following is the five folds classification of criminals.7

1) Born criminals
2) Occasional criminals
3) Passionate criminals
4) Insane criminals
5) Habitual criminals.

Positive school of criminology emerged out of the reaction against the earlier
classical and neo classical theories. The greatest contribution of this school lies in
the fact that the attention of the criminologist was drawn for first time towards the
individual means towards the personality of the criminal rather than his act i.e
crime or punishment. Criminals now to be treated rather than punished. Protection
of these infected persons from the germs of criminality is necessary. Thus positive
school has given birth to modern sociological or clinical approach.

It is successfully established that mobility, culture, religion, economy, political

ideologies, destiny of population, employment, situations etc also have direct
bearing on the incidence of crime in the society. Thus crimes are caused due to
combination of a number of factors or circumstances.8

The Ecological School:

The ecological school examines factors including the environment and other social
factors that may lead to criminal behaviour.

Social Disorganization Theory:

According to this school of thought high crime rates are indices of an underlying
state of social disorganization. Increase or decrease in population can cause social

7
Ferri project –Enrico Ferri.
8
Criminology and penology – prof.N.V.Paranjape
disorganization, rapid changes in technology, industrial growth, cultural conflict
etc.9

The Differential Theory

This theory was developed by Professor Edwin Sutherland an America
criminologist. This theory is based on the following points:

1. The processes which result in criminal behavior are fundamentally the

same in form as the processes which result in lawful behavior. Criminal
behavior, just like lawful behavior is learned. Thus a person who is not
already trained in crime cannot invent criminal behavior

2. Criminal behavior is determined by a process of association with those

who commit crime just as lawful behavior is determined by association
with those who are law abiding.

3. Differential association is the specific causal process in the development

of criminal behavior. The principles of the process of association are the
same in the development of criminal and lawful behavior but the
techniques, training, motive etc in the two processes differ. This is why
Sutherland calls it differential association.

4. A person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions

favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of
law.

5. The chance that a person will participate in systematic criminal behavior

is determined roughly by the frequency and consistency of his contacts
with other persons of a criminal behavior.

6. Cultural conflict is the underlying cause of differential behavior. This is

common in areas where society is composed of people of different races,
ethnic groups, habits and cultures.

7. Social disorganization is the basic cause of systematic criminal

behavior.10

9
https://learning.uonbi.ac.ke
10
https://learning.uonbi.ac.ke
V. SOCIOLOGICAL SCHOOL:

The sociological school of criminology believes that society influences a person to

become a criminal. Examples include social learning theory, which says that
people learn the criminal behavior of the people around them, and social conflict
theory that says that class welfare is responsible for the crime.

The sociological school of criminology, which seeks to locate the cause of crime in
the social environment. As stated earlier, trade was the first to reject the positivist
anthropological approach and argued that the crimes were the result of the human
tendency to imitate others. However, sociologists took their researchers and tried to
relate variations in the crime rate with changes in social organization. They
successfully established that other factors, such as mobility, culture, religion,
economy, political ideologies, the fate of the population, employment situations,
etc., have a direct relationship with the incidence of crime in a society determined.

Sutherland, tried to explain several processes through which a person becomes

criminal. In this theory of the Differential Association, he suggested that the
human personality and culture are directly related and that a person becomes a
criminal mainly because of the chain of circumstances in which he associates or
moves. It is for this reason that the sociological school has often been characterized
as a rational school of criminology that recommends the application of
humanitarian methods for the treatment of offenders. People prone to crime should
be corrected with persuasive methods instead of traditional punitive methods.

However, the defenders of the recent "theory of multiple factors", while explaining
the cause of crime, consider that crime is the product of a variety of factors that
cannot be reduced to general propositions. In other words, no specific theory of
criminal behavior is possible. Therefore, crimes are caused due to the combination
of several factors or circumstances. But this point of view has been vehemently
criticized by Albert Cohen, because proponents of the multiple-factor theory have
confused the factors with the causes of the crime. In addition, it affirms that it is
wrong to locate the causes of crime in the factors because the latter can be easily
eliminated without changing the social environment. According to him, the
explanation of the cause of the crime can be found in "differential opportunity"
instead of "differential association". Subcultures lead to criminality due to conflicts
or portraitist tendencies that are predominantly found in the lower strata of society,
which leads to violence in an attempt to obtain status and equal opportunities.11

V. CLINICAL SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY:

More recently, with the development of human psychology there is greater

emphasis on the study of emotional aspect of human nature. This branch of
knowledge has enabled modern criminologists to understand the criminal
behaviour of offenders in its proper perspective. Prof Gillin, therefore rightly
remarked that the theory of modern clinical school on the side of crimogenesis,
presupposes offender as a product of his biological inheritance conditioned in his
development by experiences of life to which he has been exposed from infancy up
to the time of the commission of crime. Thus, clinical school takes into account
variety of factors. It further suggests that the criminals who do not respond
favorably to correctional methods must be punished with imprisonment or
transportation for life while those who are merely victims of social conditions
should be subjected to correctional methods such as probation, parole,
reformations, open-air camps, etc., thus, briefly speaking, individualism has
become the cardinal principle of penal policy in modern penology. The main theme
of clinical school is that personality of man is a combination of internal and
external factors, therefore, punishment should depend on personality of the
accused. This is known as correctional trend of reformation through
individualization.12

VII.CONTROL THEORY OF CRIME:

The main founder of this theory, Durkheim, believed that crimes are generated
when the social and personal controls that prevent most people from becoming
involved in crime are weakened. In other words, the weakening of the link between
individuals and the group is an indication that social control is not working. Albert
Reiss also subscribed to this new Durkheim publication and said that when social
control is strong, there would be crimes. Personal controls are internalized within
the family, while schools, social sanctions, laws, etc., represent social control.13

11
Criminology-Prof.N.V.Paranjape, pg:54,55.
12
Criminology –Prof.N.V.Paranjape
13
Criminology , penology –Prof.N.V.Paranjape.
The theory of control can also be considered as a rational choice theory. The
"linked" among us have a share in compliance, or something that weighs on the
"losing side" of a cost-benefit analysis. To participate in a crime is to risk the loss
of valuable bonds for the family, teachers or employers. The link in control theory,
thought of in this way, is an informal deterrent. The theory of deterrence (Geerken
and Gove 1975) is generally written in terms of a formal deterrent system provided
by the criminal justice system.

As originally conceived by criminologists, police, prosecutors and the courts of the

Classical School, they strive to increase the cost of committing crimes so that those
costs outweigh the benefits of illegal behavior. In the case of the convicted, the
courts try to do this by varying the sentence so that the condemned are convinced
that they should avoid crime in the future. This deterrence directed at those already
in violation is known as "specific" or "special" deterrence. The non-criminal public
is persuaded by general deterrence to avoid crime. They perceive that crime does
not pay when they see others sanctioned. Then, when considering criminal options,
they weigh the usefulness of the illegal action against the potential cost in the form
of sanctions. According to the theory of deterrence, when those positive profits are
overcome by cost-effective deterrence, they choose not to participate in the crime.14

Society’s Attempt to Control:

While the theories discussed above focus on the causes of crime, they are also
important in describing how social systems control crime. Societies attempt to
control the behavior of people living within their borders with a combination of
formal and informal control systems. The theory of social disorganization and the
theory of anomie are examples of how crime occurs when normative control is
broken. The differential association and sub cultural explanations describe how
informal social control is subverted by socialization that supports criminal
behavior instead of compatible behavior. Theories of control focus specifically on
how weak systems of informal social control fail. The obvious exception to this
last statement is the part of control theories that are also theory of deterrence. The
theory of deterrence considers informal systems of control, but an important part of
this thesis is aimed at explaining how formal systems, or the criminal justice
system in Western societies, try to control criminal behavior.15

14

15
Most criminologists believe that informal systems of control are considerably more
efficient than formal systems. This makes sense if one remembers that the police
cannot regulate us as much as we do when we have internalized the conventional
norms, and likewise, the police cannot observe our behavior as much as our
families, friends, teachers and neighbors. The criminal justice system is then
reduced to supporting informal systems of control (thus the interest in block-watch
programs by police departments), engaging in community policing and patrol
patterns that discourage crime, or reacting after violations have occurred.16

MULTI CAUSATION THEORY OF CRIME:

Crime is the result of multiple causes, which can be detected through careful study.
The factors can be individual, physical, natural or social anthropological. The
anthropological factor includes age, sex, marital status, profession, domicile,
instruction of social rank, education, organic and physical constitution. The
physical factors are race, climate, fertility and soil disposition, the relative duration
of day and night seasons, weather conditions and temperature. Social factors
consist of population density, emigration, public opinion, customs, religion, public
order, economic and industrial conditions, agricultural and industrial production,
public administration of public safety, education and public education, public
welfare and, in general, civil and criminal justice legislation.17

According to Dr. Cyril Burt “Crime is assignable to no single universal source, not
yet to two or three, it springs from a wide variety there are at least four grades of
factors which can be applied in a specific case.

i.) The principle or most conspicuous influence.

ii.) The chief co-operating factor or factors.
iii.) Minor predisposing or aggravating conditions.
iv.) Conditions present but apparently inoperative.

There cannot be a single solitary factor for the commission of delinquency or

crime, it is the result of many factors.

16
sociology. iresearchnet. Com/sociology- of -crime-criminology.
17
. criminology and penology administration-J.P.Sirohi.
Dr. Jyotsna H. Shah had divided the factors of delinquency causation into two
parts,18

a) Inside the home

b) Outside the home.

The theory of multiple causation explains a crime with reference to the

combination of factors. The facts are distorted by a dogmatic approach. Hence,
according to Sheldon and Glueck. "The multi-factor approach is much more
enlightening." A crime is committed only when a peculiar combination of personal
and social factors is combined with an absolutely unique physical structure of a
human being19.

Maximum factors responsible for the commission of the crimes indicated and
attempted to explain in this thesis.

CAUSES OF CRIME:

Criminal is a person who commits a crime. But, in democracy, unless criminality is

shown in court, the wrongdoer is not considered criminal. But until now, with a
scientific purpose, it is considered that a criminal is one who commits a crime.
Then, another question will arise: if the offenders will be treated as criminals? If
the criminal for the rest of life is called "criminal", the whole society will not keep
away from the word "criminal" and all people, knowingly and unknowingly,
commit at least one crime at least in life. So the word criminal is also difficult to
define. The mention of different theories of crimes is an essential requirement of
this thesis that is attributed mainly to the concept of reform. The basic thesis is that
crime is a disease and that a doctor must cure it without causing any fatal damage
to the body of the human being. Below are some of the theories of crimes that
generally lead the human being to commit crimes.20

i) Physical ailments.
ii) Poverty
iii) Lack of education
iv) Fear
18
Criminology and criminal Administration-J.P.Sirohi
19
Juvenile delinquency –A challenge –Dr. J.H. Shah.
20
Shodhanga.inflibnet.ac.in
 v) Mental diseases
vi) Climatic condition
vii) Conflict
viii) Culture conflict
ix) Family size
x) Economic determinism
xi) The born criminal
xii) Kleptomania
xiii) Pyromania
xiv) Imitation
xv) Lack of sanitation
xvi) Avarice
xvii) Use of tobacco
xviii) Alcoholism
xix) Narcotics drugs
xx) Cinemas
xxi) Child employment
xxii) Social custom
xxiii) Idleness
xxiv) Other factors leading of causation of crimes.

OTHER FACTRORS:

1) The unwholesome influence of bad environment/company

2) Undesirable environment.
3) Lack of moral culture
4) Un-healthy conditions of work in factory.
5) Society’s apathy and lethargy
6) Faulty theories of punishment.
7) Defective prison system
8) Lack of after-care of the criminals
9) Lack of proper home training.
10) Quarrels between parents
11) Broken homes.
12) Overcrowding in one room.
13) Trouble caused by step parents.
 14) Favoritism of child over the rest of other childrens.
15) Lack of love of the parents in case of defective child.21

Above, I try to collect most of all the factors, which will lead to the cause of
crimes in humans. All these factors can be called gems of the disease of
criminality that is considered as a disease. You have to try to kill gems of the
disease to cure the patient suffering from the disease. In other words, the reform
process is the reform process, which is a basic idea of this thesis. It is essential to
affirm here that the study of the factors mentioned above is essential while we
treat the concept of reform.

21
Shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in