No special skill was required to be called in action to determine.

the quantum or the quality of

punishment; nor were reasons to be furnished for the decision rendered. The judicial belief was
circumscribed by traditional penal theories of deterrence and retribution. The judge would fix the
maximal or minimal of prescribed penalty or put it somewhere in between in accordance with his
own wisdom, experience, beliefs and prejudices. In practice, the judicial decision on the sentencing
aspect of the case had not called for much attention nor did it consume much time of the court. The
situation has been changing imperceptibly and gradually. 13 An awareness of the newer theory of
"reforming the offender", or more precisely the idea of affording an opportunity to an offender to
reform himself under conditions provided therefor, is making a debut in penological thoughts and
judicial actions. The existence of a non-punitive mode of sentencing, though statutorily alive for
long, is making its presence felt in

somewhat higher degree than was the case before. The most significant method of extra mural
treatment of offenders has centred round the concept of probation.

1
For a discussion of leading tendency in the development of judicial sentencing policy in recent years, see D.A.
Thomas, Principles of Sentencing 3-31 (1970),