Edwin Sutherland defined White Collar Crime as:

Crime which is committed by a person who is having high social status and also
having respectability which is acquired by him in the course of his occupation.

Hartung defined White Collar Crime as:

A violation of law regulating business which is committed for a firm by the firm
or its agent in the conduct of its business.

Herbert Edelhertz defined White Collar Crime as:

An act which is illegal or series of illegal act which is committed by using such
means which are non- physical and these acts are done for the purpose of
concealment or guide for obtaining money or for the purpose of avoiding the
payment of loss in respect of money or property or for the purpose of obtaining
any business and in some cases the purpose is personal advantage.

Contribution Of Sutherland Towards White Collar Crime

Edwin Sutherland defined White Collar Crime as, Crime which is committed by
a person who is having high social status and also having respectability which is
acquired by him in the course of his occupation Sutherland definition of White-
Collar Crime is therefore built upon three overlapping circles of misbehaviour.

The first circle represents any crime committed by a person of high status. The
second circle represents the crime committed by a person having
respectability.The third circle represents the crime committed in the course of
occupation.

Sutherland distinguished himself from those who preceded him in one important
respect. He made the study of white- collar crime not only respectable but
feasible. He stated the problem clearly and succinctly. He spearheaded the
systematic study of the phenomenon. He articulated a distinctive theoretical
concept of white -collar crime and provided an operational definition and
supported his thesis with empirical data based upon legal and administrative
violations of 70 companies.

Thus, Sutherland contributions can be best summed up in the following

propositions:
Sutherland concept of white- collar crime has put forward the kind of crime
committed by powerful and influential members of the elite society
Sutherland pointed out that White-Collar Crime was more dangerous to the
society than crimes committed by the members of the lower class because the
financial loss were higher and damage is inflicted on public moral.
Sutherland also elaborated the reasons why such crime went unpunished
because of their social status and principally due to difference in their social
position.
White Collar criminality is real criminality, being in all cases in violation of the
criminal law
White Collar criminality differs from lower- class criminality principally in an
implementation of the criminal law which segregates white collar criminals
administratively from other criminals.
The theories of criminologist that crime is due to poverty, psychopathic and
sociopathic conditions are invalid because first they are derived from samples
which are grossly biased with respect to socio-economic status; second, they do
not apply to white collar crime criminals; and third they do not even explain the
criminality of the lower class since the factors are not related to a general
process characteristic of all criminality.
A theory of criminal behaviour which will explain both white collar criminality
and lower-class criminality is needed.
A hypothesis of this nature is suggested in terms of differential association and
social disorganisation.

Sutherland impact was great and unmistaken. He reoriented the thinking of a

generation of criminologists and others to come. He provided personal
leadership in theory development and research verification. He inspired others
to follow his example. He raised controversial issues and sharpened debates
over existing theories and research of crime and delinquencies. Largely because
of his influence the period between 1940 and 1960 was described as the
classical period in the research and study of white-collar crimes.

Impact Of Sutherland's Legacy

The cumulative effect of Sutherland's contribution has given earth breaking
concept to white collar crimes with defined body, substantive content and
renewed focus to gather the momentum. Sutherland's concept of White- Collar
Crime provided conceptual tools, theoretical foundations and database for later
researchers to build upon. Thus, Sutherland's legacy by virtue of his pioneer
quality set the tone, pace, texture, direction of later research and debate in the
field.

Criticism Of Sutherland's Definition Of White- Collar Crime

Sutherland definition of White- collar crime:
A crime committed by person of respectability and high social status in the
course of his occupation was fraught with objective ambiguity and has not given
subjective value judgement. The term respectability and high social status was
not capable of precise definition and is subjected to much less objective
measurements.

Many scholars raised issues with regard to the definition given by Sutherland on
the concept of white- collar crime. Lack of conceptual clarity how important is
social status in finding white collar crime criminality and what is the exact
meaning of occupational activity are some key points where Sutherland faced
criticism with regard to his definition on white collar crime.

While some scholars criticized Sutherland's definition because the definition has
included deviant behaviour and has covered a broad range of diverse and
inconsistent behaviours that did not considered them as criminals.

Conclusion
It is clear from the above discussion that white- collar crime are different from
the other type of offences as these offences cause harm in a greater magnitude if
compared to the magnitude of the traditional crime and these offences do not
represent the cases of positive aggression or the cases of invasion, though these
offences generally do not create a direct or immediate injury but actually they
create such type of great danger which may hamper the economic growth of the
country.

After discussing the ambit of white-collar crime and contribution of Sutherland

towards White Collar Crime there is a need for the establishment of some
special courts that would particularly and exclusively deal with these types of
offences and there should be effective and speedy disposal of these types of
cases so that the offender cannot get away from the purview of justice.
Capital punishment or the death penalty is a legal process whereby a person is
put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime. The judicial decree that
someone be punished in this manner is a death sentence, while the actual
enforcement is an execution. Crimes that can result in a death penalty are
known as capital crimes or capital offences. The term capital originates from the
Latin word "capitalis", literally meaning "regarding the head"[1] (referring to
execution by beheading).

Capital offence refers to any criminal charge which is punishable by the death
penalty. Crimes punishable by death vary from state to state and country to
country. In some American states these offenses may include first degree
murder (premeditated), murder with special circumstances (such as intentional,
multiple, involved with another crime, with guns, of a police officer, or a repeat
offense), and rape with additional bodily harm, and the federal crime of treason.
A charge of a capital offense usually means no bail will be allowed.

Criminological Approach Of Capital Punishment

When we talk of capital punishment, two theories of punishment, namely
preventive theory and reformative theory occupy our minds.

"An eye for an eye will turn the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi

This line by Mahatma Gandhi is the thrust of the Reformative Theory of

punishment. The most recent and the most humane of all theories are based on
the principle of reforming the legal offenders through individual treatment. Not
looking to criminals as inhuman this theory puts forward the changing nature of
the modern society where it presently looks into the fact that all other theories
have failed to put forward any such stable theory, which would prevent the
occurrence of further crime. According to reformative theory, the aim of
punishment is to educate or reform the offender himself. The Reformative
theory is supported criminology.[2]

We know that "prevention is better than cure". The idea behind the preventive
theory of punishment is to keep the offender away from the society. The
offenders are punished with death, imprisonment of life, transportation of life
etc. Preventive theory was supported by utilitarian law reformers because of its
humanizing influence on penal law. In their view, it is the certainty of law and
its severity which has a real effect on offenders.

The development of the institution of prison is essentially an outcome of the

preventive theory of crime. The main purpose of preventive theory is to take
such step as the accused person does not repeat the offence after enjoyment of
sentence.

Capital Punishment: An Effective Deterrent To Crime:

There is a great deal of debate over how powerful a deterrent capital
punishment is. Most of us have an instinctive feeling that the death penalty must
deter, at least to some extent. Deterrence is one of the fundamental reasons for
punishment of any kind. Since death is considered the harshest punishment
available under the law, it seems logical that it must also be the most effective
deterrent to crime. The English barrister Sir James Stephen remarked, "No other
punishment deters men so effectually from committing crimes as the
punishment of death."

"In any secondary punishment, however terrible, there is hope; but death is
death; its terror cannot be described more forcibly."[3] The federal prisons now
have custody of a man sentenced to life imprisonment, who, since he has been
in prison, has committed three more murderers on three separate occasions-
both of prison guard and inmates. There is no further punishment that he can
receive. In effect, he has a license to murder."[4]

Capital Punishment In Various Countries

BRITAIN:
Hanging was the traditional form of capital punishment in England. However, it
was not the only one. In England beheading was normally reserved for the
highborn and it was last used in 1747. Hanging was the most common method
of execution in England from Saxon times until the 20th century. The last
people to be hanged in Britain were two men, Peter Allen and Gwynne Jones
who were hanged on the same day in 1964. In Britain the death penalty for
murder was abolished for an experimental period of 5 years in 1965. It was
abolished permanently in 1969. Free votes were held on the restoration of
capital punishment in 1979 and 1994 but both times it was rejected.[5]
CHINA:
Capital punishment in the People's Republic of China is usually administered to
offenders of serious and violent crimes, such as aggravated murder, but China
retains in law a number of nonviolent capital offenses such as drug trafficking.
The People's Republic of China executes the highest number of people annually,
though other countries (such as Iran or Singapore) have higher per capita
execution rates.[6]

Thirteen crimes were removed from the list of capital offenses in 2011,
including smuggling of cultural relics, wildlife products, and precious metals.
This brought the total number of capital offenses down from 68 to 55 though
many of the crimes dropped from the list were rarely if ever punished by the
death penalty.

Capital punishment is also imposed on inchoate offenses, that is, attempted

crimes which are not actually fully carried out, including repeat offenses such as
attempted fraud. The recidivistic nature of the offenses, not their seriousness per
se, is what is adjudicated to merit the capital sentence.

INDIA:
Year 1975 and 1991, about 40 people were executed. Year 1995-2004 when
there were no executions. Anti-death penalty activist dispute those figures,
claiming much higher numbers on Death Row and actual executions. In August
2004, a 41-year old former security man, Dhananjoy Chatterjee, was executed
for raping and killing a 14 year old schoolgirl in Calcutta. This was the
country's first execution since 1995. In 2005, about a dozen people were on the
country's Death Row. It was reported in 2006 that the number of mercy
petitioners with President Abdul Kalam from convicts on death row stands at
20, including 12 were submitted when K.R. Narayanan was the President.[7]

AMERICA (U.S.A.):
Capital punishment (also called the death penalty or execution) in the United
States is limited under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution,
and, in practice, is used almost exclusively for aggravated murders committed
by mentally competent adults.

Contemporary Status Of Capital Punishment In India

India retains capital punishment for a number of serious offences.1819 The
Indian Supreme Court has allowed death penalty to be carried out only in 4
instances since 1995 in cases which were "rarest of rare and shakes the
collective conscience of the community".

The Supreme Court in Mithu vs. State of Punjab 2[8] struck down Section 303
of the Indian Penal Code, which provided for mandatory death punishment for
offenders serving life sentence.[9] Imposition of the capital punishment is not
always followed by execution (even when it is upheld on appeal), because of the
possibility of commutation to life imprisonment.[10] The number of people
executed in India since independence in 1947 is a matter of dispute; official
government statistics claim that only 52 people had been executed since
independence.[11]

However, the People's Union for Civil Liberties cited information from
Appendix 34 of the 1967 Law Commission of India report showing that 1,422
executions took place in 16 Indian states from 1953 to 1963, and has suggested
that the total number of executions since independence may be as high as 3,000
to 4,300.23 In December 2007, India voted against a United Nations General
Assembly resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty.[12]

In November 2012, India again upheld its stance on capital punishment by

voting against the UN General Assembly draft resolution seeking to ban death
penalty. The Supreme Court in Mithu vs. State of Punjab (1983) struck down
Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code, which provided for mandatory death
punishment for offenders serving life sentence.

The case of Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab[13] challenged the constitutional
validity of capital punishment and on the grounds that it was against the article
14, 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution. But the Supreme Court did not
consider it illegal and stated that capital punishment was to be granted only in
"rarest of rare cases".

It was held in Jagmohan Singh vs. State of U.P.[14] that death sentence act as
deterrence but as token of emphatic disapproval of the crime by the society,
where the murder is diabolical in conception and cruel in execution and that
such murderers cannot be simply wished away by finding alibis in the social
maladjustment of the murderer. Expediency of transplanting western experience
in our country was rejected, as social conditions and so also the general
intellectual levels are different.

The court referred to the 25th Report of the Law Commission of India, in which
it was stated that India cannot risk the experiment of abolition of capital
punishment. The fact that the possibility of an error being committed in the
matter of sentence can be corrected by appeals and revisions to higher courts
was relied upon.

Debate Over Its Abolition And Retention

Arguments For The Retention[15]:
Capital punishment acts as a deterrent:
If the death sentence is removed, the feat that comes in the mind of people
committing murders will be removed. "Do we want more of murders in our
country or do we want less of them?" All sentences are awarded for security and
protection of society, so that every individual may live in peace. Capital
punishment is needed to ensure this security.

Elimination of the criminals:

When the public peace is endangered by certain particularly dangerous forms of
crime, death penalty is the only means of eliminating the offender.

Possibility of repeated murders:

Society must be protected from the risk of a second offence by a criminal who is
not executed and who may be released, after release may commit murder again.

Condition in India:
In countries where capital punishment has been abolished, the figure of
homicide is very low; four in a million, or even less than that.

Prison administration:
Keeping murderers alive in the prison greatly complicates the work of prison
administration. If all convicted murderers were imprisoned, safety of the prison
staff and the general public from the dangerous prisoners would be at risk.

Saving of funds:
Money of the citizens should not be spent on maintaining people who cause
great harm.The taxpayers should not be called upon to pay for the maintenance
of anti-social criminals for an indefinite or for a very long period.

Proportionate to crime:
The punishment should bear a just proportion to the crime. Therefore, capital
punishment is the only fit punishment for those who have deliberately violated
the sanctity of human life.

More humane:
Capital punishment in a painless and humane form is less cruel than
imprisonment for life.

No miscarriage of justice:
If there is miscarriage of justice in one or two cases, the higher courts can be
approached. The whole machinery of the Government would be there to protect
the life of a person who is really innocent.

Arguments For The Abolition

Capital punishment:
should be abolished because it is a legalized, revengeful and cruel destruction of
God's most wonderful creation, the human being.

Immoral:.
Capital punishment is morally indefensible. Society has no right to take the life
of any person. It is morally wrong for the State in the name of the law to take
the life deliberately. In eliminating the criminals, it is stated; the State does not
erase the crime, but repeats it.

Inhuman:
Capital punishment is essentially inhuman. Death penalty is a form of cruelty
and inhumanity unworthy of a humane civilization; even the most efficient
methods of execution do not result in instantaneous and painless death.
Humanity demands that capital punishment comes to an end.

Non-violence:
Indian ideology is based on non-violence. Indian tradition is based on
reformation of the mind and spirit. Where it was the opinion that only God
could take away life given by him. Therefore a murderer should be sent to a
penitentiary and there given every chance of reforming himself.

Irrevocable:
Capital punishment is irrevocable. If an innocent person is sentenced to death
and executed, the greatest injustice results. When as a result of an erroneous
conviction, a man is sent to prison, he can be compensated. But death admits of
no compensation.

Unjust:
The sentence of death injures the family of the offenders, and thus imposes
suffering on persons who have done nothing to deserve the suffering.

Unequal application:
Death penalty is applied unequally. Some persons who have not sufficient
financial means to defend themselves or are morally unable to do so, suffer.[31]
The penalty, therefore, which should be the expression of absolute justice, often
leads in practice to injustices against individuals.

In the wake of above discussion and ground realities of present day world
following conclusions can be drawn: The opposition to abolition of the death
penalty stems from the myth that it will lead an increase in the number of
murders. The fact is that in the state of Travancore there were 162 murders
between 1946 and 1950 when the death penalty was not in force, But in the five
years from 1950 when it was re-imposed, there were 967 murderers. It has been
argued that it is not possible to fight such crimes by framing law.

What we need is to target the root of crime. Even Krishna Iyer J. conceded in
Rajendra Prashad's case that death penalty may be awarded where the killer is
such a monster or a beast that he can never be reformed. Criminals, who can be
hired to kill anyone or to throw a bomb in a crowd killing many innocent men,
women and children, deserve no sympathy.

We cannot ignore the interests of the community or the country while

considering whether death sentence would be appropriate in a particular case.
So far as juveniles are concerned they have to be dealt with under the
appropriate Acts for juvenile offenders and there is no question of awarding
death sentence in their case.; Thus, after taking into consideration the interests
of the individuals on the one hand and interests of the community on the other,
it would be highly imprudent to abolish the death penalty.
Introduction

Serving punishment for those who indulge in criminal activities is an important

function of the criminal justice system. There are various theories as to why and
how offenders are punished. The main theories of punishment are retributive
theory, preventive theory, deterrent theory and reformative theory.
Imprisonment is the most popular form of punishment and it is said to be both
preventive and deterrent. However, we have been seeing a shift in society’s
approach towards punishment. Now, many scholars are of the opinion that a
reformative model of punishment is necessary, as our primary aim should be
reformation and rehabilitation of criminals. Many academicians and jurists are
of the opinion that corporal punishment and imprisonment harden the minds of
petty offenders, especially first time offenders. Therefore, it is necessary that in
certain cases, offenders must be provided with a chance to redeem themselves.
Both parole and probation are recognized as methods of correction and
rehabilitation in the Indian criminal justice system.

Meaning of probation

The word probation is derived from the Latin word ‘probare’, which means ‘to
test’ or ‘to prove’. It is an alternative method of correction which is non-
custodial. If it is established that incarceration is not suitable for the offender,
then the offender can be released into his community under the supervision of
probation officers, instead of being imprisoned.

In India, the provisions related to probation in the Indian legal system are
provided mainly under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Probation
of Offender Act, 1958. Initially, the provision of probation was given in Section
562 of CrPC, 1898. After several amendments, the provision is currently
provided by Section 360. The Parliament of India enacted the Probation of
Offenders Act in 1958 before the amended CrPC came into force in 1973, which
contains certain provisions not covered by the CrPC.

Code of Criminal Procedure

In CrPC, the provisions that deal with probation are Section 360 and 361.
Section 360(10) explicitly states that the provisions in Section 360 and 361 do
not affect the validity of the provisions in the Probation of Offenders Act or
Children Act, 1960 or any such law.

Release on probation of good conduct

Section 360(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is what deals with probation.
According to this Section, if

Any person who is not below the age of twenty-one and is convicted of a crime
for which the punishment is either imprisonment of seven years or a fine,
or any person below the age of twenty-one or any woman convicted of an
offence that is not punishable with life imprisonment or death penalty and the
offender has not been convicted in the past,
and appears before the court, the court may release the offender on the promise
of good behaviour or good conduct, on entering into a bond with or without
sureties, to serve the sentence if called by the court during the fixed period.
In the case of Phul Singh v. State of Haryana (1979), the Court stated that
probation on the ground of good conduct cannot be granted to someone in his
twenties who has committed a heinous offence like rape.

Release after admonition

As per Article 360(3), the offender can be released when the following
conditions are satisfied :

 The offender has not been convicted in the past.

 The offence for which he is convicted is theft, theft in a building or
dishonest misappropriation or any offence under IPC that is punishable
with imprisonment of not more than two years or with a fine only.
 In the case of Ahmed v. State of Rajasthan (2000), the Court stated that
this provision cannot apply to a person who has used explosives to incite
communal tension.
Special reasons for not granting probation

If the court does not award probation, the reason for not providing probation to
the offender must be expressly stated in the judgment, whether it’s as per CrPC,
Probation of Offenders Act, Children Act or any such law, as per Section 361.

Probation of Offenders Act, 1958

In this Act, the provision of release on admonition is provided by Section 3 and

the provision of probation of good conduct is provided by Section 4, and the
terms are the same as the ones in Section 360 of CrPC.

Section 5 of the Act permits the court, if it is found suitable, to direct the
offender to pay compensation to the victim for the loss or injury incurred to him
or even the cost of the legal proceedings.

Section 6 of the Act deals with offenders below the age of 21.
This Section states the following :

The court has to first see whether Section 3 or Section 4 of the Act is applicable
for the offender under the age of 21. For that, the court has to call for the report
of the probation officer, which is mandatory.
On receiving the report, the court can decide whether the provisions are
applicable or not.
If the court doesn’t grant probation, it must explicitly state the reasons for not
doing so.
Section 7 of the Act states that the report of the probation officer is meant to be
confidential. Such a report is only mandatory while dealing with offenders
under the age of 21.

Doctrine of Harmonious Construction

Even though the new CrPC was enacted subsequent to the Act, it does not affect
the applicability of the Act, especially when Section 360(10) explicitly
recognizes the validity of the Act. Therefore, we could say that offenders are
entitled to the benefits of both CrPC and the Act. According to the Doctrine of
Harmonious Construction, the legislature would not intend to contract
themselves. Thus, the enactment of the new Code would not destroy the
enforceability of the Act.

Merits and demerits

The following are the merits posed by the method of probation:

 It helps to prevent first time offenders from being influenced by criminals

in prison.
 It protects and rehabilitates juvenile offenders.
 It helps in preventing prisons from being over-crowded.
 It provides an offender with a second-chance to function normally in
society.
 The following are the demerits of the system of probation:
 It permits offenders to free themselves from legal consequences.
 It sends a bad message to people intending to commit crimes that they
can walk out free.

Meaning of parole

The word ‘parole’ originates from the French phrase “je donne ma parole”,
which means “I give my word”. Like probation, the objective of parole is to
allow the prisoner to redeem himself. But parole is a form of release that is
applicable only for offenders who are undergoing their prison sentence.

In India, rules regarding parole are provided by the Prisons Act, 1894 and the
Prisoners Act, 1900. However, there is no completely uniform law of parole in
India as the state governments are free to make their own laws for parole. The
guidelines for parole have minor variations from state to state.

Refusal of parole

The following are the types of offenders who cannot be granted parole:

 Who are not citizens of India.

 Convicted for crimes that pose a threat to national security.
 Convicted for crimes against the State.
  Violation of disciplinary rules in prison.
 Types of parole

There are mainly two types of parole, which are custody parole and regular
parole.

Custody parole

Custody parole is also called emergency parole. It is granted for fourteen days
for reasons like the death of close family members like grandparents, parents,
siblings, children, spouse, for the marriage of a family member like that of a
sibling or son or daughter, etc.

Regular parole

Regular parole is granted for a maximum period of one month, usually for
offenders who have served at least one year of their sentence. It is granted for
reasons similar to the following:

 Due to any family member being seriously ill.

 Death or accident of a family member.
 When the convict’s wife has given birth.
 To maintain familial ties.
 When there has been serious damage to the life and property of his family
due to any natural calamity.
 To file for a special leave petition.

Procedure

On the filing of a petition for parole, usually the Superintendent of the jail
requests a report from the police station which arrested the convict. The report,
along with all the necessary documents required for the justification of the
request for parole and the recommendation of the Superintendent, is submitted
before the Deputy Secretary, Home (General), State Government, and he
decides whether the convict must be granted parole or not.
In some states, the above mentioned documents are sent to the Inspector
General of the Prison and he then sends them to the District Magistrate. The
District Magistrate, on the consultation of the state government, decides
whether or not parole has to be granted.

Merits and demerits

As established in the cases of Budhi v. State of Rajasthan (2005) and Charanjit

Lal v. State (1985), the provision of parole has certain objectives and purposes.
The following are the merits or purposes of provision of parole, as per the
decisions:

 It enables prisoners to stay in touch with their families and community.

 It helps them to be involved in important matters pertaining to their
families, and also solve their personal problems.
 It gives them a short period of relief from the ill effects of being in prison.
 It achieves the purpose of rehabilitation and reformation of the prisoner.
 It encourages prisoners to maintain good conduct in prison.
 The following are the demerits of the provision of parole:

Good conduct during imprisonment is not a guarantee for good conduct after
release.
The chances of political interference are very high. Privileged prisoners with
political connections have it easier to receive parole.
Distinction between probation and parole
1. Probation is granted to offenders who are released into the community
under supervision, instead of being imprisoned. But parole is a temporary
release for prisoners and comes with conditions to be followed by the
prisoner during that period.
2. In India, probation is governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure and
the Probation of Offenders Act. But we cannot find a uniform and
concrete set of rules and regulations for parole. Though it is recognized
under the Prisons Act and Prisoners Act, the state governments are
authorized to issue their own parole guidelines, causing variation in
parole guidelines across the nation.
3. Probation refers to the judgement given by the court to convicts.
Meanwhile, parole is just an arrangement of the temporary release of
prisoners.
4. Probation is an alternative form of penalty granted instead of
imprisonment, but parole is granted during imprisonment. Parole is not an
alternative to imprisonment.
5. Probation is pronounced by the court. Probation is judicial in nature.
Parole in India is usually decided by the Deputy Secretary of the Home
Ministry of the State or by the District Magistrate. Parole is mostly quasi-
judicial in nature.
6. Probation is granted before the convict undergoes imprisonment and
parole is granted after the prisoner undergoes a minimum period of
imprisonment.
7. Probation is not granted to offenders who have been imprisoned or
convicted before. Parole is granted to offenders undergoing
imprisonment.
8. When an offender who has been released on probation, defaults on any
conditions of probation, he is resentenced to prison for a particular period
of time. But violating the conditions of parole sends a convict back into
prison to resume the imprisonment based on the original judgment.
9. Probation is the first stage in the correctional system of an offender. But
parole is in the last stage after the offender undergoes a period of
punishment.
 10.There is less stigma for a person undergoing probation as he is not
sentenced to prison. But when a prisoner is released on parole, he would
face discrimination in society.

Conclusion
To sum up, both parole and probation are legally recognized methods of
rehabilitation and correction in the criminal justice system of India, though they
are not recognized as ‘rights’ per se. It helps in reducing the ill effects of
imprisonment on convicts and reduces the negative influence of hard-core
criminals in the minds of other convicts. However, it might create an impression
on many people with malicious intentions that the criminal justice system is
lenient and that they would not suffer any repercussions.
 Theories of Punishments

Humans have always been capable of dreaming brutal ways to punish alleged
witches, offenders, etc. Even the penal system in ancient India had also been
very ruthless. So, it would not be wrong to say that for ages, extremely violent
and brutal methods of execution and punishments have come and gone in the
entire world; few of these included pushing off the cliff, being crushed by an
elephant, boiling method, blood eagle, and whatnot.
Historically the use of grave punishments is much older compared to the use of
imprisonment or incarceration. Imprisonment is a punishment because an
individual is removed from society and confined behind bars with other
criminals. However, it is a milder punishment than many other forms used for
centuries, like capital punishment or the death penalty. So, this article will
discuss the types of punishment in ancient India to boost up your knowledge,
theories of punishment, and many more. So, stay tuned till the end.

Types of punishment in Ancient India

Punishments have ranged from the most severe penalty to the death penalty
(painful) to the payments of fines (painless) for every offense committed.
Looking at the records, Amnesty International recorded 579 executions in 18
countries in 2021, an increase of 20% from 2020. This represented the second
lowest number of executions recorded by Amnesty International since 2010.
The types of punishment prevalent in India were

1. Death Penalty
Capital punishment means the legal and authorized killing of someone as a
punishment for an offense, that is, the death penalty for a crime. Previously, in
ancient times, capital punishment was executed for every small crime. But, it is
given only in the rarest of rare cases. Some of the forms of capital punishment
used in ancient times were:
 Stoning: It was a method of capital punishment in which a group of
people throws stones at a person until he dies. This is somehow still
prevalent in Islamic countries etc.
 Pillory: In ‘Pillory,’ the criminal was forced to stand in a public place
with his head and hands locked in an iron frame so that he couldn’t move,
and then he was whipped, branded or stoned, etc.
  Immurement: Here, the offender was constructed into a wall making it
the most barbaric and painful form of execution of the death penalty.
 Crushing by elephant: Under this punishment, the offender was thrown
under the feet of an intoxicated elephant for being crushed.

Corporal Punishment
This type of punishment involves physical pain in the body. (Corporal is derived
from the Latin corpus, meaning “physical body.”) It is also as old as capital
punishment. Example: cutting off the hands of thieves; whipping and flogging
etc. The aim of this punishment is not only to punish the offender but also to
prevent the repetition of the offense. Some of it is:
 Flogging: This means ‘beating or whipping’ someone with a stick. In
India, it was recognized under the Whipping Act of 1864, which was
ultimately abolished in 1955.
 Mutilation: It involves causing severe damage to a person's body, such as
removing a part of the body. For example: In the ancient period, one or
both of the hands of the offender were chopped off.
 Imprisonment: The kind of imprisonment that you see today is
absolutely different from the kind of imprisonment which was awarded in
the ancient period. For example: tying the hands and legs of offenders &
throwing them in a dry well.

3. Social Punishment
It is a punishment in which a person is restricted from making any kind of
contract with other persons or to move him to other places where he has no
contract with the other persons who can help him in any manner otherwise, he is
also liable for the punishment for it. Its forms are:
 Banishment: Banishment means to expel a person. In this, the criminals
were transported to far-off places for isolation. This practice was
abolished in 1955 and was replaced with “Imprisonment for life.”
 Social Boycott: It means an act of forcing a person to abstain from any
kind of contact with other people in society.

4. Financial Punishment
We can also refer to it as imposing for fine. It was a common way of
punishment that was generally assigned for the breach of traffic rules, revenue
laws, & petty crimes. IPC, even today, prescribes fines as punishment.
Presently, how to determine whether an offender is inflicted with severe
punishment like an eye for an eye or be given a mild punishment as there is
always a scope of reformation or rehabilitation? So this can be done with the
help of theories of punishment.
Theory of Punishment in India
There are various theories of punishment in India applicable in the present era
out which the reformative theory is followed in India:
1. Retributive Theory
 Retributive refers to punishment, repayment, or making restitution.
Primitive societies mostly used punishment as retaliation. It was
permitted for the victim of wrongdoing to exact retribution on the
perpetrator.
 Criminal law was founded based on "an eye for an eye," "a tooth for a
tooth," "a nail for a nail," and "a limb for a limb." "It is well known that
the early forms of judicial procedure were founded on retaliation," said
Justice Holmes.
 This theory aims to help the offender understand their sorrow and grief.
The proponents of this theory argue that the offender merits suffering.
The political equivalent of personal vengeance is said to be the misery
inflicted by the State acting in its official position.
2. Deterrent Theory
 To deter is to “refrain from acting or doing.” Deterrent is “the imposition
of harsh punishments to deter the offender from repeating the offense.”
 This theory contends that the goal of punishment is to make the
perpetrator a deterrent to future wrongdoers and a role model for those
with criminal tendencies.
 According to Salmond, criminal justice's deterrent components are crucial
for crime control. In England throughout the Middle Ages, the
punishment was based on the deterrence idea. Even for small infractions
like pickpocketing and theft, severe and inhumane penalties were the
standard practice.
3. Preventive Theory
 The term "theory of disablement" is another name for preventive theory.
This theory contends that the goal of punishment is to deter crime rather
than exact revenge.
 This idea seeks to render the offender helpless. Punishments such as
death, banishment, or forfeiture of an office prevent repeat offenders. The
offender is deterred from committing another crime by being locked up.
 The proponents of this theory believe that jail is the best punishment
since it works well as both a preventive measure and a deterrent.
Bentham backed the preventative idea because it made the penal code
more humane.
4. Reformative Theory
 The rehabilitation of offenders is the goal of punishment by reformative
theory. This theory aims to transform the offender's mindset and
rehabilitate him into a law-abiding member of society.
 An offender remains a human even if he commits a crime under certain
conditions. He may not perpetrate the offense under the same conditions
again. Crime is a mental illness brought on by several antisocial factors.
 Thus, treating criminals mentally rather than punishing them will
accomplish the goal. Criminals who have received education and training
will be capable of exhibiting proper social behavior. The main motive is
to rehabilitate the offender.
5. Compensatory Theory
 This theory holds that the goal of punishment must include compensating
the crime's victims and preventing future criminal activity.
 It is founded on the idea that a victim should be made whole for the
wrongdoings committed against him. The victim is entitled to
compensation on two different grounds.
 First, the offender who caused harm to the person or property is
responsible for making up for their wrongdoing. Second, the State is
responsible for protecting its citizens; if it cannot do so, it must
recompense the victims.
 Imprisonment
Imprisonment is the word which means taking away the freedom of prisoners
when they are punished by a court of law. They are locked up in prison and all
the rights are taken away they are not given any rights which are under Article
21 or 32 of the Constitution of India. They have to stay in jail till the end of the
imprisonment given by the court of law before that they are not allowed to be
released from the jail.

Types of Imprisonment
1. Mandatory imprisonment- When any person commits a crime it becomes
mandatory to give him/her punishment for that crime because if the
person who commits crime are left with no punishment he will become
dangerous to society it harms whole public. This is the reason criminals
are not kept free after he commits any crime they have to face
imprisonment.
2. Maximum sentences- The person who commits crime they got life
imprisonment and the duration of life imprisonment is decided by a court
of law. The minimum life imprisonment is 14 years but it can extend upto
30 years of life imprisonment.
3. Minimum life imprisonment- The minimum life imprisonment is for 14
years. It is decided by the Supreme Court of India.
4. False imprisonment- Many times people unlawfully caught by the police
and get imprisonment because of false crime.

Life Imprisonment Meaning

Life imprisonment means the whole life in prison. Prisoners has to end up their
life in prison. They have no other options of release. According to the Supreme
Court life imprisonment means jail term for the prisoner for entire life.
 There will be no release before fourteen or twenty years of life
imprisonment.
 The prisoner has no such right as to release.
 The period of life imprisonment cannot be reduced. It cannot be less than
14 years.
Under what cases life imprisonment can be granted under IPC?
The report is based on the punishment of imprisonment for life in the Indian
Penal Code. Itdeals with the sentence of imprisonment for life which is rigorous
or simple. The State Government has clarified the law on imprisonment for life
in this report. This report is made by the Law Commision of India for the
clarification of law. According to this report, the offences under Indian Penal
Code have come into effect in the year 1956 on 1st of january. And the Code of
Criminal Procedure came into Existence in the year 1955. After this report two
old laws were replaced namely punishment of transportation for life.

Purpose of Imprisonment
There are five purposes of Life imprisonment:
1. Punishment: when any person commits a crime, they are punished by a
court of law then put in the jail that deprives them of all their freedom
and removes them from their society. Punishment may change the person
into a good person and return their fundamental freedoms and also give
them a chance to live in society freely with their family members.
Sometimes it also provides them work so they again, don’t commit a
crime. So punishment is important for the criminals.
2. Deterrence: deterrence is another type of punishment for the offenders so
that they don’t repeat their crime again because punishment teaches
values to the offender and give them an opportunity to change themselves
and transform them into a law-abiding citizen.
3. Public protection: when any person commits big crime like murder or
rape, they have to face life imprisonment as ordered by the judge. This is
the only reason we can protect the public from these criminals.
4. Rehabilitation: rehabilitation means when a prisoner is ready to accept the
crime he has committed and take some necessary steps to change
themselves in that case the government chooses to give them an
opportunity, in prison itself, to change.
5. No other choice: after committing crime prisoner have no choice of
release they have to face imprisonment.

Case laws
The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir vs State of J&K & others
1. The details of the petitioner about the period of the sentence was given in
paragraph 1 which petitioner has undergone till 31.05.2012
2. If we want to deal with the issue of the case in the right way and reach to
the conclusion of the case.
Here are some of the questions to discuss through which we can deal with the
case in the right manner.
  Whether life imprisonment means entire natural life or 20 years of life
imprisonment?
 Whether a life convict can be released automatically after completion of
twenty years without any orders from the state, including the jail
authorities?
When I went through the provisions of the law, I reached the conclusion that life
imprisonment means imprisonment for life and it does not automatically come
to an end without any order from the competent authority.
Some more related cases with a similar matter came up for consideration before
a division bench of this court.
Md. Munna vs Union Of India & Ors on 16 September, 2005
Facts of the case:
The writ petition is filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. The
petitioner was found guilty of murder. And previously he has already got
imprisonment for life for 21 years. In this petitioner claimed that life
imprisonment should be equivalent to 20 years and further subject to remission
admissible under law.

Life imprisonment in India

Under article 72 and 161 CrPC life imprisonment means the entire life in prison
which is guaranteed under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The minimum
duration of life imprisonment is of 14 years and also commuted the death
sentence to the prisoner.
Judicial precedents on duration of Life imprisonment
Case laws:
Maru Ram Etc. Etc vs Union Of India & Anr on 11
Facts of the case:
This case is based on the power of remission act under article 72 and
161. Revisiting the law on remission – The Hindu. In this case the
Constitutional Validity of Section 433-A of the Criminal Procedure court, 1973
was upheld. Petitioner has filed a case alleging the provisions of Article 14,
20(1), 72, and 161 of the Constitution of India.Landmark judgment

Impact of Life Imprisonment

Effects of prison:
Prisoners has a very bad effect of the prison in their life. Prison’s main aim is to
cure the criminals and make them a good person so they can live in the
particular society with normal people with full freedom. Prisons have their own
culture, rules and regulations. Prisoners has to follow the rules and regulations
of the prisons and they have no choice in their life. They always have a fear of
deterioration.
They lack personal choices and they have to work according to the prisons
rules. They have to dedicate their lives to the prison. But some people in the
prison get completely changed or unscathed by the prison experience. As we see
prisons are very painful, and incarcerated persons suffer very long-term
imprisonment and because of that are affected with a lot of pain, deprivation,
etc.

Effect of prison in children

Thousands of children are, every day, locked up in the prison due to different
reasons. They are locked up with adults. In some of the prisons youth get the
quality education in the prison to make him a good person and can be relieved
from the prison after a short period of time. This type of prisons are also called
as schools.
Health facilities are also provided to the children in the prison. They are cared
for in the prison in every manner possible. Many youths are facing solitary
confinement for only 22 to 24 hours. This punishment is very harsh on children
because they have to face physical injuries, emotional trauma and many more
things.
The death penalty for young offender is banned by the Supreme Court of India.
Because below the age of 18 youth are immature, irresponsible. This is very
important for young prisoners to be treated nicely and help them to improve
themselves with feelings of happiness and joy. If they are not treated well, they
can face severe mental trauma. It can also affect their life very badly.

Case law
Raju vs. State of UP & another
Facts of the case:
This case is related to Protection of Children Act and THE JUVENILE
JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN. In this case there
were two boys named Raju and Ashish who are bullies and goondas of the area.
They ever-tested and molested the daughter of defendant. Then the brother of
the girl came at the scene and tried to protect her but Raju and Ashish pushed
both of them into the pool.
  Effect of prisons in women
According to the Criminal Justice System women are supported in the prison.
They are treated well in prison. Female prison population in India is 53%. They
are increasing day by day. The reason for the increase in women’s population in
prison is, they get involved in drug trade. The women who belongs from lower
community they generally get involved in drug trade because of shortage of
money, shortage of food etc.. They don’t have houses to live so they have to get
involved in this trade forcefully because of their families. This trade destroy the
life of a woman because of this their children get harmed.
Difference between Women and Men Prisoners

Woman in prison Men in prison

1. Women’s prison- 84% Men’s prison- 76%
2. Offences- theft, involved Offences- robbery, sexual offences, fraud, drugs,
in drug trade. and motoring offences
3. 80% theft because of
Because of many reasons.
shoplifting.
4. 28% woman’s crimes
20% of men.
were financially motivated.
5. Sentenced woman- 22% Sentenced men- 12%
6. TV licence evasion
Men- 6%
accounted-36%

Psychological effects
The prison was originally designed to allow prisoners to rediscover themselves
like conscience and better voice through conversion. Unfortunately, it was later
discovered that it is a form of torture because it ended up causing many
prisoners adverse psychological effects such as:
1. Delusion
2. Dissatisfaction with life
3. Claustrophobia
4. Depression
5. Feeling of panic
6. And on many instances madness
7. Stress
8. Denial
 9. Nightmares and the inability to sleep
10.Phobias
11.Substance abuse
12.Criminal activity
13.And some forms of self-destructive behavior
14.Guilt
15.Shame
16.Suicidal tendencies

Other effects are

1. Depend on institutional structure and contingencies
2. Interpersonal distrust and suspicion
3. Emotional over-control, alienation, and psychological distancing
4. Social withdrawal and isolation.
5. Incorporation of exploitative norms of prison culture.
6. Diminished sense of self-worth and personal value.
7. Post-traumatic stress reactions are shown in the prisoner during the pain
of prison.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Life Imprisonment

Advantages
 If a person commits a crime like rape or murder, it gives a very serious
impact on the life of victim or victim’s family because of this their lives
get destroyed. So accused get life imprisonment or death sentence.
 Capital punishment means if legallly someone is killing someone then as
a punishment takeing the life of the person is not valid.
 Life imprisonment gives a chance to the criminals to realize their
mistakes so their life imprisonment or death sentence can be pardoned or
remitted.
 Prisons give chance to prisoner to study and explore themselves in good
works they provide them employment so they can change the prisoner to
release them from the prison.
 Prisons for youth is very favorable. They try to help them with all the
facilities and guidelines to improve them and support them so they can
live in the particular society with normal people.
 Prisons provide good food and health facilities and many more facilities
to the prisoners to change themselves or to live a happy life.
  Many prisoners get released of their change and they are allowed to live
in the particular society and with a job, so they can earn something for
their own lives and change their life and their family’s life.

Disadvantages
 Life imprisonment cannot be given to prisoner for capital punishment as
they are not only responsible for the crime. This is the biggest mistake it
can make the prisoners’ life hell.
 Capital punishment is the way in which we can pass some messages to
the normal individual.
 Capital punishment help to remove dangerous criminals from society
making it a safer place for the people.
 Life imprisonment can help people from the discrimination which they
are facing in the society due to their crime, which should be corrected by
giving capital punishment to murderers.

Life Imprisonment vs Death Penalty

Life imprisonment Death penalty

1. Life imprisonment is not so harsh
Death penalty is defined as the death
because it also help prisoners to
sentence which is given to the prisoner for
change themselves, it is not so cruel
their crime.
like death sentence.
2. Life imprisonment gives chance to
prisoners to change themselves by
Death penalty is very cruel and harsh to
providing them with schools and colleges in
prisoners it doesnt give any chance to
the school to explore themselves and they
proove themselves if they are given death
are also provided with health facilities, etc.
sentence by the court.
and also help them to keep in touch with
their families.
3. It gives chance to prisoners so they can
In death penalty the prisoner only get death
realise their mistake and get to know what
sentence. In case if their family members or
bad things are done. They get a chance to
friends get a chance to prove them right then
correct their mistake during life
death sentence can be pardon.
imprisonment.

Remission of Sentence in India

Power of remission is defined in the section 432 and 433 of Criminal Code of
Procedure. Life imprisonment is subjected to Statutory Powers of Remission. If
punishment is given with the executive process then remission can be premature
release in a sentence of life imprisonment. Because of the Power of Remission
Act punishment which is decided by the judiciary has the very serious. It can
disturb the constitutional balance as well as separation of powers.
Power of remission is important when we have to review the premature release.
Under section 302 of Indian Penal Code prisoners can file a writ petition against
Jail Authorities. If Jail Authorities for placing their case in front of State
Advisory Boards for shortening their life imprisonment.
 Life imprisonment without the possibility of release.
Supreme court gives the decision of death penalty or life imprisonment without
the possibility of release. Prisoners has to face lime imprisonment for life. They
have no chance of release. They have to spend their whole life in the prison.
Pardoning Power of the President
President of India is the head of the state. And the powers of the president is
always termed as an extraordinary power which includes grant of pardon. The
constitution of India also grants the power of pardon to the President of India.
The power of pardon is mentioned in Article 72 of the Indian Constitution.

Rules of pardon the death sentence:

1. If punishment is given by the court martial the president has the power to
pardon or commute the sentence of any person.
2. The offences which is committed which is related to law or it belongs to
the executive power of the union.
3. President can pardon death sentence.

Pardoning Power of the Governor

Meaning of discretionary power
Discretionary means “freedom to act according to one’s
judgment”. Governor has the power of discretion means he has the power or
right to take decisions freely. He can exercise his power in his own individual
judgement without the advice of the council of ministers.
Discretionary power is divided into two parts:
1. Specific Discretionary Powers: in this Governor uses his specific powers
to take the decisions of certain case. Certain responsibilities are provided
to governor for the discretionary power. He is not bound to anyone. He
doesn’t have to ask anyone for the decision. Powers can only be used in
time of legal requirement.
2. Circumstantial Discretionary Power: many times the power of the
Governor become circumstantial. Governor is not questionable in any
manner if he doesn’t take decisions in the time of discretion. Governor
decision is final in his discretion.

Prison conditions in India

In some major cities of the country that we visit, and probably we see some,
unlucky faces who gets arrested and tortured, or worse, by the hands of the
police. In many countries entirely there is lack of protections for civil liberties
available in India. Though, some in linking in advance that we would find
extensive police abuse of detainees. It is not yet discovered about the conditions
of prisons and jails, to which detainees are sent after the police are done with
them.
If incarceration is meant to punish, life inside the prisons will be worse. Though
prisons are supposed to be leveling institutions in which the variables that affect
the conditions of confinement are expected to be the criminal records of their
inmates and their behavior in prison, other factors play a part in many countries.
But India and Pakistan have retained colonial-era regulations that explicitly
counter the concept of prison as a leveler.
The management of prisons falls exclusively under the domain of the State
Government, as per the seventh schedule of the constitution. In every state, the
prison administrative machinery works under the chief of prisons who is a
senior ranking IPS officer. Indian prisons face three long-standing structural
constraints, overcrowding, thanks to a high percentage of undertrials in the
prison population, understaffing and underfunding. The inevitable outcome is
subhuman living conditions, poor hygiene, and violent clashes between the
inmates and jail authorities.