SCHOOL OF LAW
SAL1053-PENOLOGY AND VICTIMOLOGY
Introduction
Penology is a multi-disciplinary subject that aims for the study and
evaluation of the application of penal laws onto the wrongdoers. It
broadly explains the justification, characteristics, and effectiveness of
punishment in its various forms. In other words, it is a systematic
study of different facets of punishment and its impact on crimes,
criminals, and society. As a matter of fact, penology owes its origin to
Cesare Beccaria, the classical school of criminology. This Italian
criminologist argued that justification of punishment must be to deter
potential criminals, and not merely to punish the offender. Later, it
was during the end of the 19th century that different theories of
punishment were propounded focusing on the aims and objectives of
the punishment.
Scope
The scope of penology is vast and hence it becomes difficult to define
the same. Penology is almost seen in every aspect and type of
punishment for the crimes and offences. To limit the scope we have to
study basically all the aspects of penology, where all the things are
explained in their wider senses.
Modern penologists lay greater emphasis on the rationalism of
punishment. The penal policy should be more reformation oriented
rather than coercive penal sanctions. As Lewis Gillin (1871-1958)
rightly observed:
“The criminal is the product of his biological inheritance conditioned
in his development by the experiences of life to which he has been
exposed from early infancy up to the commission of a crime. By
studying the offender in every possible way, the modern penology
promises to throw light on his conditioning and arrive at a diagnosis
of the factors entering into each individual case. From the standpoint
of penology, it attempts to adapt the treatment of each offender in
accordance with the diagnosis obtained by the scientific study of the
criminal.”
Adopting a similar approach to penology, the Supreme Court in Santa
Singh v. State of Punjab , observed that “penology regards crime and
criminal as equally material when the sentence has to be awarded. It
turns the focus not only on the gravity or nature of the crime but also
on the criminal and seeks to personalize the punishment so that the
reformist component is also many operatives as the deterrent element.
A proper sentence is an amalgam of many factors such as nature of
the offence, circumstances, previous record of the offender, his age,
education, employment and family background, the possibility of
social adjustment and reformation, etc.”
Relationship between penology and victimology
It must retreat that criminology is one of the branches of criminal
science which is concerned with the social study of crimes and
criminal behaviour. It aims at discovering the causes of crimes and
effective measures to combat it
Penology deals with care, custody, treatment, prevention, and control
of crimes as also the various modes of sentencing and rehabilitation of
criminals.
The primary concern of victimology is to seek justice for victims of
crime who are faced with multiple problems. It deals with the rights
and claims of victims of crime and their dependents. The focus is on
mitigating the sufferings of crime victims and providing them with
compensatory and other reliefs.
The policies which are postulated by these three branches i.e.,
criminology, penology, and victimology are implemented through the
agency of criminal law. Broadly, all these taken together constitute
the subject-matter of criminal science.
Approach of penology
Like in criminology, penology may also be approached from various
points of views. These may be denoted as Administrative Penology,
Scientific Penology, Academic Penology, and Analytical Penology.
Administrative Penology
The administrative personnel employed for custodial functions in
prisons ought to be capable persons conscientious of their
responsibility to the society. They must be well-educated and
imparted entry-level training before taking the job. Services old
psychologists, social workers, and media persons should be availed
for assisting the prison authorities in carrying out their correctional
programmers. Prison guards and jail supervisors owe a special duty to
keep the inmates under control and special vigil on prisoners who
have no loyalty to the prison.
Scientific Penology
Individualization of prisoners should be the object of privatization and
the effectiveness of rehabilitative techniques is essentially dependent
on relaxing the custodial and disciplinary conditions keeping in view
the personality needs of each inmate. The services of therapeutic
specialists may be used for scientific corrective treatment of inmates
in prison. The prison environment should be corrective rather than
punitive.
Academic Penology
Academic penology is basically descriptive in character, and its main
purpose is being the dissemination of penological knowledge. It limits
itself with the theoretical knowledge of penology.
Analytical Penology
It aims at ascertaining as objectively as possible, the adequacy of
existing penal policies and methods and suggests measures for
improving the system. Thus, it makes a critical analysis of penal
measures and offers solutions for the efficient administration of penal
justice.
The basic principle underlying the modern penology is that the
sentences awarded ought to be proportionate to the gravity of the
offence. In operating the sentencing system, the law should adopt the
corrective machinery or deterrence based on the factual matrix of the
case. The nature of the crime, the manner in which it was planned and
committed, the motive of the commission of a crime, the conduct of
the accused, the nature of the weapons used, and all other attending
circumstances are relevant facts which should be taken into
consideration before sentencing the accused. The court must not keep
in view the rights of the victim to the crime but also the society at
large while considering this imposition of an appropriate sentence.
Awarding inadequate sentences out of uncalled for sympathy for the
accused would do more harm to the justice system and undermine the
public confidence in the efficacy of the penal system.[5]
Caution against excessive reformation
Despite the fact that traditional methods of deterrent and retributive
justice have fallen into disuse and they are now substituted by modern
reformatory measures, it must be stated that excessive reformation is
likely to defeat the very object of penology. If the difference between
life inside and outside prison is narrowed down beyond a certain
limit, it is bound to culminate into catastrophic results. The element of
deterrence is as necessary for any penal program as reformation;
otherwise, the very purpose of punishment will be defeated. It must be
realized that the ultimate control and prevention of crime depends on
the proper utilization of criminological knowledge to the needs of
society.
This accounts for the emerging importance of applied criminology in
recent years. The focus of attention should therefore not only be the
offender or his criminal act but the interest of society in general and
the rights of the victim, in particular, which must be protected at all
costs. It is only then that the real objective of penology would be
accomplished. A balanced penal program justifying deterrence when
it is absolutely necessary and reformation as a general model of
treatment of offenders would perhaps be the best policy to achieve the
desired ends of criminal justice administration.
Justice must be prompt, stern, and summary inspiring a wholesome
fear in the criminal. It must not be forgotten that the protection of
society against crime and criminals is far more important than the
personal gain of the individual offender in committing a particular
crime. Therefore, it is the offender who must suffer in the larger
interests of the community. Then only the real ends of penal justice
can be accomplished. It must be remembered that punishment
presupposes an offence and the measure of punishment must not be
lesser than the offender deserves. It must be recognized that there is a
strong and wide-spread demand for retribution in the sense of
reprobation.
It may have retreated that the faith and philosophy behind the
administration of criminal justice is the attainment of social justice
and not individual justice. Therefore, a blatant shift to reformation
cannot be accepted as our constitutional creed. Commenting on this
aspect of penal justice, Justice Gulab Gupta, a former judge of the
High Court of Madhya Pradesh pointed out “if reformation, in fact,
benefits the society, the conscience of social justice would be satisfied
but if the reformation accrues to the benefits of the individual alone,
social justice would remain suffocated. Let this not happen even
unwillingly or unknowingly.”
The active participation of the people in the implementation of the
correctional penal program may be helpful in exercising effective
control and supervision over the offenders. Since the criminal is the
product of the community is for the community to devise ways and
means to solve this problem. The Nyaya Panchayat system
representing community justice may perhaps play a significant role in
this sphere. The Lok Adalats which are meant for quick and cheap
justice may also go a long way in accomplishing the objective of
social justice. The statutory recognition given to Lok Adalats by
the Legal Services Authorities (Amendment) Act, 2002 is indeed a
progressive step in this direction.
Above all the impact of information technology and its widening
dimensions have to be recognized by the legal fraternity, particularly
those who are concerned with the administration of criminal justice.
The courts, advocates, academicians, law teachers, and even the
litigants have to acquaint themselves with the use of the developed
and developing tools and technologies to meet the demands thrown up
by numerous statutes and litigation explosions.
The computerization of courts, offices, law-chambers, and libraries, a
listing of cases, judgments, etc. has rendered it possible to make the
necessary information instantaneously available. Thus, it will greatly
help in plugging the loop-holes of the existing criminal justice system
and expose and destroy inefficiency, unfairness, and injustice which
have crept into the administration of criminal justice. The efforts that
are being made in recent years to switch over to e-courts with e-
governance for e-justice would certainly go a long way in restoring
the confidence of the people in the criminal justice system which lost
its credibility being too expensive and dilatory. The development of
ADR mechanism Lok Adalat’s plea-bargaining and setting up of the
Fast- Track Courts are some of the measures which certainly help to
strengthen the cause of the criminal justice system in India.
Recent development
According to the modern view, lawbreakers can be deterred by harsh
penalties as a cost of breaking the law. It has been generally observed
that developing countries like India focus more on penalties rather
than their effective implementation. The weak implementation of laws
and harsh punishments lead to a culture of public and private
violence, lawlessness and impunity, as can be observed in India today.
The laws relating to social policies such as Article 377 on
homosexuality or beef bans and prohibition laws, which are gaining
popularity all over the country are accompanied by over-strict
penalties. Even in non-prohibition states like Delhi, the possession of
a few cases of beer, or a collection of more than nine bottles of single-
malt whiskey, could land one to a jail term of three years. Added to
the list in upholding criminal defamation under section 400/500 IPC.
Defamation is essentially a civil wrong that was criminalized during
the British period when duels aimed at defending honour and
reputation posed a threat to public order. The need of the hour is that
India should improve the delivery of speedy justice in civil
defamation cases, instead of retaining criminal defamation.
Conclusion
Some penologists have suggested that punitive reaction to crime
varies and fluctuates in accordance with the phase through which a
particular society or nation is passing. For instance, during the periods
of revolution or war, the use of death sentence, banishment, solitary
confinement, confiscation of property, etc. as punishment may be
extensively used, but the same may not be justified In periods of
peace and tranquillity. In the Indian context with the incidence of
terrorist attacks rising unabated, the death penalty for terrorists may
be fully justified though it has to be used in rarest of rare cases.
Similarly, the widespread corruption at all levels, particularly, among
the high placed bureaucrats, politicians, corporations’, etc. fine to the
tune of lakhs of rupees accompanied but the confiscation of ill-gotten
wealth as a punishment would be more appropriate rather than
incarceration, and perhaps, ostracization of such culprits would be
more effective.
Commenting on the prevailing criminal justice system in the country,
the Chief Justice of India, Justice P. Sthasivam, while speaking on the
occasion of National Legal Services Day (on 6th November 2013)
observed that “justice is still in a cynical phase for the common man
despite efforts being made to make it accessible. Endorsing his views,
Justice G.S. Singhvi in his address to the legal fraternity said that,” it
is time to ponder whether in 65 years we have been able to achieve
the goal to provide justice for people and whether we have created an
atmosphere where everybody has equality of opportunity and status
for people. According to him, “Justice was still an illusion for
millions of people in the county and it is not accessible to a majority
of the population.” The plight of the victims of crime needs to be on
the priority list of courts and law adjudicators.
