Criminology & Correctional

Administration

Asst. Prof. Priyanka A. Khakhadia

Introduction
The scientific study of crime and criminality is a relatively recent development. The
term criminology was coined by an Italian Law Professor Raffaele Garofalo as
“Criminologia” in 1885.
The term ‘criminology’ obviously suggests that ‘crime’ lies at its core, and the Shorter
Oxford Dictionary stretches the definition to ‘the scientific study of crime’.
Larry J. Siegel defined criminology as “Criminology is the scientific study of the
nature, extent, cause and control of criminal behavior”.
2
• Renowned American criminologists of the 20th century Edwin H. Sutherland
defined criminology as “Criminology is the body of knowledge regarding crime
as a social phenomenon. It includes within its scope the processes of making
laws, of breaking laws, and of reacting toward the breaking of laws”. The
objective of criminology is the development of a body of general and verified
principles and of other types of knowledge regarding this process of law, crime,
and treatment.
• Elliott: According to him, “Criminology is the scientific study of crime and
and its treatment”.
• V.R.Krishna Iyer, J. in his inaugural address on "Prospectives in Criminology"
opined that "Criminology is a systematised knowledge on the sociological
plane dealing with 'deviance' and 'dharma' (and asks what norms are good, why
do people break rules, how does the judicial process try them and how far are
the 'persons' while in prisons and on parole or release). He further opined that
'Criminology is for the community and criminologists are the unacknowledged
legislatures (legislators) of the world'.
3
 Criminology: Its nature & Scope

Acc. to Dr. Stephen Hurt Wits -Broadly speaking, criminology deals with the legal
psychiatric aspect or the medico-psychological, biological, pedagogical or
sociological aspect of criminality and the factors related therewith. It, therefore,
follows that criminology and criminal policy are interdependent and mutually
support one another. Thus, criminology seeks to study the phenomenon of
criminality in its entirety. The science of criminology may further be split into
two, namely,
(1) theoretical or pure criminology; and
(2) applied or practical criminology.
4
Theoretical or Pure Criminology
Prof. W. A. Bonger preferred to study theoretical or pure criminology under
the following heads:
• Criminal Anthropology
• Criminal Sociology
• Criminal Psychology
• Criminal Psycho- neuro-pathology; and
• Penology

Applied or Practical Criminology

It includes the study of criminal hygiene and criminal policy, which is founded
on solid derivative conclusions.

5
Nullum Crimen Sine Lege
There can be no crime without a statute that quiet specifically forbids the
behavior involved.

Nulla Poena Sine Lege

No one can be punished for an act unless it is made punishable under the law.

6
 Criminology- whether a science

Criminology is a Science: The view that criminology is a separate science has

been strongly supported by Ellanbuger. He claimed that, if medicine is to be
treated as a science, criminology also must be treated as a separate science. He
pointed out that just as medicine is based on anatomy, psychology, physics,
chemistry etc. Criminology also is based on other social sciences. Neither
medicine nor criminology are purely theoretical. They have a meaning, which
derives from their practical applications. The justification for medicine lies in
public health, that of criminology in penal reform, penology and prevention of
crime. Both have a series of value judgments and each has its ethical purpose.
According to Russian Criminologist, Prof. G. Avanesor - Criminology is a judicial
science. 7
Criminology is not a Science: The advocates of German School argue that
criminology cannot be regarded as a separate science. Max Weber, Advocate
of German School regarded Criminology as value free, that it does not give
answers as to how people should behave. According to this approach, a science
cannot be value- oriented and the purpose of scientific sociology is to
understand social events and not to suggest value-oriented solutions.
Therefore, criminology cannot be a science if the only aim is to study crime,
criminal, criminal law, prison etc. Further, criminology depends upon a variety
of related social sciences and it has no independent scientific techniques and
methods of its own. Hence, it is not a separate science.

8
Conclusion: Both the views stated above have a series of value judgments.
The view that criminology cannot be regarded as a separate science for the
reason that it depends upon a variety of related social sciences cannot be
denied. However, in view of its long- standing history and effective
functioning in eradicating crimes in the society, though criminology is not a
science by itself, it serves all the purposes of the modern science, Therefore,
criminology can be regarded as a separate science.

9
 The Concept of Crime

• The concept of crime is essentially concerned with the social order. It is well
known that a man's interests are best protected as a member of the community.
• Salmond has defined law as a "rule of action" regulating the conduct of
individuals in the society.
• The conducts which are prohibited by the law in force at a given time and place
are known as wrongful acts or crimes whereas those which are permissible by
law are treated as lawful.
• Crime is an unlawful act against the society
• It is defined as a legal wrong the remedy for which is punishment.
10
Early concept of Crime

• Till 1700’s, crime was viewed, as an activity committed by a person under

the influence of a demon & was the result of supernatural forces.

• Historically, the concept of crime seems to have always been changing with
the variations in social conditions during the evolutionary stages of human
society. This can be illustrated by the fact that early English society during
12th and 13th centuries included only those acts as crime which were
committed against the State or the religion. Thus, treason, rape and
blasphemy were treated as crime whereas ‘murder’ was not a crime.

• Primitive societies did not recognise any distinction between the law of
crime and torts but only knew law of wrongs. Commenting on this point,
Frederick Pollock and Maitland observed that the English society prior to
tenth century confused crimes with torts because the bond of family was far
11
stronger than that of the community, the injured party and his kindred could avenge
the wrong by private vengeance and self-redress. During this period, recourse to legal
remedy was considered merely an optional alternative to self-redress. The wrongdoer
was supposed to offer compensation to the person wronged, the quantum of which
depended on the extent of the wrong caused and the status of the sufferer.

 In the Eighteenth & Nineteenth Century

In the European countries, particularly in France and Italy, the period of eighteenth
century witnessed an era of miraculous reorientation in criminology thinking. The
earlier emphasis on crime, the idea that crime was the result of divine displeasure, the
superstitions and myths were all abandoned and the study of crime and criminal was
started afresh on a scientific basis. It was firmly established that no one else than the
offender himself could be attributed criminal responsibility for his crime and the
external agencies had nothing to do with it.

12
Thus it would be seen that the concept of crime is closely related to social policy of
a given time. With changes in ideologies the concept of crime also changes.
That is to say, certain new crimes spring up whereas some existing crimes become
obsolete and, therefore, they are deleted through adequate changes in the criminal
law. It is for this reason that the criminal law has often been considered as a
barometer to gauge the moral turpitude of the society at a given time.
In other words, the social standards of the society can conveniently be judged by
studying the criminal policy adopted by it. A few illustrations from the Indian
society will support this contention. The legislative measures to legalize abortion in
certain cases sufficiently reflect the changing concept of morality in Indian society.
More recently, the stringent anti-dowry laws enacted to prevent the incidence of
dowry-deaths' and bride-burning and deterrent legislation against the practice of
sati providing for death sentence and fine to those who abet this evil practice in any
form clearly indicate that the society is no longer going to tolerate atrocities against
women and desires to assure them a dignified place in the community.
13
 Twentieth Century
There has been considerable increase in crime rate in recent decades. This
phenomenon, however, is not peculiar to India alone. The crime statistics all over
the globe have recorded a similar trend. In fact, the incidence of crime in western
countries is far greater than that of India, perhaps because of the variance of social
conditions in these countries.
The factors such as greater control of family over the wards and respect for
morality and religion, etc. have acted as effective restraints to reduce the incidence
of crime in India.
Generally speaking, the upward trend in crime rate can be attributed to
modernisation, urbanisation, industrialisation, advance of science and technology
and growth of civilization, and advent of materialism.
With economic growth, people's craze for wealth and other luxuries of life has
increased beyond limits which cannot be quenched with the available resources.
Obviously, persons who cannot resist their temptations quite often resort to
unlawful means to meet their ulterior motives. 14
 Twenty-first Century
Hi-tech world and use of computer network has given rise to cyber crimes and
other computer related unlawful activities. Cyber crimes are harmful acts
committed for or against a computer or against information on computer network.
These crimes differ from most terrestrial crimes in four ways.
• Firstly, it is easy to learn how to commit them,
• secondly, they hardly require any resources,
• thirdly, they can be committed in a jurisdiction without being physically present
in it, and
• fourthly, they are often not clearly illegal.

15
Undeterred by the prospect of arrest or prosecution, the cyber criminals
operate around the computer network and thus are a menace to e-mail or e-
commerce users. These cyber crimes cover a wide range of illegal activities
which include frauds, hackers, viruses, pornography, harassment, stalking,
data-diddling etc.
These offences call for need to recognize the fact that criminal law must
continue to evolve if it is to address itself adequately to new developments in
information technology. Because of the cyber crimes' international potential,
there is need for an effective anti-cyberspace international law for preventing
cyber crimes.
These developments necessitate a fresh approach to crime and criminals so as
to cope with the new situations and keep crimes well within control.

16
 Difference between Crime & Sin

• What is Sin?
• Sin can simply be defined as an action or way of behaving that is not
allowed by religion, something considered incorrect by God, or an
offence against religious law.
• What is Crime?
• Crime can be defined as legal wrong. It’s a form of conduct that has
been declared socially harmful in a state and forbidden by law. Defying
this law leads to punishment.

17
Sin: Sin is provided in respective religious books of different religions.
Crime: It is the set of rules that are provided in criminal statutes; those are
the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), etc.
Sin: It results in violation of rules of religion.
Crime: It includes a breach of law.
Sin: A person committing sin is punished by God.
Crime: A person committing a crime is punished by the state.
Sin: There is no direct harm or injury involved.
Crime: In crime, injury is an essential element.
Sin: The remedy for sin is penance.
Crime: Remedy for crime is subjected to a term of sentence by the court of law.
18
Sin: A sin is an act or behaviour that is against the religion or God’s will.
Crime: Crime is an action against the law.
Sin: It is recognised by God or religion.
Crime: It is recognised by the state or government.
Sin: It is a religious concept.
Crime: It is a legal proposition.
Sin: It is a subjective term and specifically refers to something that has no base
to measure a degree of punishment.
Crime: It is the set of rules by social codes of the nation, and on breach of such
rules, punishment is provided.x

19
 Crime

What is Crime?
• In ordinary language, a crime is an unlawful act against the society.
• It is defined as a legal wrong the remedy for which is punishment.
• Or an act and omission in violation of criminal law.

20
Halsbury defines crime as an unlawful act which is an offence against the public
and the perpetrator of that act is liable to legal punishment.
Lawyer sociologist Paul W. Tappan defined crime as " an intentional act or
omission in violation of criminal law, committed without defence or justification,
and sanctioned by the laws as felony or misdemeanour".
According to Blackstone, a crime is "an act committed or omitted, in violation of a
public law either forbidding or commanding it". However, he modified his
definition of crime and stated that "a crime is a violation of the S public rights and
duties' due to the whole community, considered as a community." This
modification in definition was necessary since the previous definition limited the
scope of crime.
Salmond defines crime as "an act deemed by law to be harmful for the society as a
whole though its immediate victim may be an individual. He further substantiates
his point of view through the following illustration." A murderer injures primarily a
particular victim, but its blatant disregard of human life puts it beyond a matter of
mere compensation between the murderer and the victim's family. 21
 Characteristics of Crime

1. An act (Actus Reus) -There should be an act or omission to constitute a crime.

Intention or mens rea alone shall not constitute a crime unless it is followed by
some external or overt act. Generally, omitting to do something will not amount to
actus reus of an offence. The criminal law usually punishes individuals for
positive conduct and not for inaction. There are, however, some notable
exceptions. For example, a police officer may have a duty to act to prevent an
assault and if he does not, he will be liable to be punished under the law.
2. Mens-rea or guilty mind -Mens-rea is one of the essential ingredients of a crime.
It may, however, be direct or implied. The implied mens-rea is otherwise termed
as constructive mens-rea. Mens rea implies that there must be a state of mind with
22
respect to an actus reus, that is an intention to act in a proscribed fashion.

3. The harm must be specifically outlawed. Any immoral or reprehensible

behaviour is not a crime unless it has been outlawed in advance. For
instance. live-in-relation is not a criminal conduct as there is no law to
outlaw it.
4. Prohibited Act - The act (conduct) should be prohibited or forbidden under
the existing penal law. An act, howsoever immoral, shall not be an offence
unless it is prohibited by law of the land.
5. External Consequences - Crimes always have a harmful impact on society,
may it be social, personal, emotional or mental. The harm must have been
actually caused. Mere intention to cause harm does not constitute a crime.

23
6. Relativity - There must be casual relation between the voluntary
misconduct (act or omission) and the resulting harm.
7. Punishment - The act in order to constitute a crime should not only be
prohibited by the law but should also be punishable by the State. The
punishment is usually set out in terms of a maximum and the actual
punishment in any particular case is left to the discretion of the judge. Both,
the defence and the prosecution have a right to appeal against the quantum
of sentence.

24
As a result of extensive analysis of crimes Jarome Hall also agrees that there are
seven inter-related characteristics of a crime, namely,
(1) harm,
(2) harm must be outlawed,
(3) conduct (act or omission),
(4) mens rea (criminal intent),
(5) concurrence of mens rea and conduct,
(6) casual relation between conduct and harm, and
(7) punishment.

25
Approaches to Crime Control

1. Family
2. School
3. Religion
4. Social Disparity
5. Police
6. Punishment
26
 Classification of Criminals

1. First offender 5. Criminal Tribe

2. Habitual offender 6. Women Criminals
3. Professional offender 7. Young Offenders

4. White Collared offenders

27
First Offender
The expression first offender refers to an offender who has no previous conviction to
his credit, apart from the offence in question. This comprises of people who have
committed a crime in self defence, ignorance or negligence.

Habitual Offender
A habitual offender, also known as a repeat offender, refers to a person who has been
previously convicted of one or more crimes in the past and is currently facing new
charges. Although many habitual offenders tend to commit the same type of crime
over and over again, a person does not necessarily have to commit the same crime in
order to be called a repeat or habitual offender.
The word 'habitually' means 'usually' and 'generally'. According to the Law Lexicon
by P. Ramanatha Aiyer, it means being constantly and customarily addicted to a
specified habit and the term habitual criminal may be applied to anyone who has been
previously convicted of a crime and committed to prison more than twice.

28
In case of Subhangi Tukaram Sawant vs R.H. Mendonca And Ors (2001 Bom. CR
Cri, (2001) 4 BOMLR 631, 2001 CriLJ 3745) several meanings are given to define
the words dangerous and habitual, whereby the Court stated that habitual word
signifies frequency and usual practice of committing crimes. A person is said to be a
habitual criminal who by force of habit or inward disposition is accustomed to
commit crimes. It implies commission of such crimes repeatedly or persistently and
prima facie there should be continuity in the commission of those offences.

As in the case of L. Ravindran vs. The Commissioner Of Police, the petitioner had
filed a writ petition under article 226 to remove his name from the rowdy list. The
contention of the Petitioner was that though his name was involved in a murder trial,
he was subsequently acquitted. Yet, his name was mentioned in the Rowdy list that
is maintained by the Police authorities.

29
Professional Offender
Professional criminal is a person who pursues crime as a day-to-day occupation,
developing skilled techniques and enjoying a certain degree of status among
other criminals.
A professional crime is one in which crime is committed in a specialized way
with prime motive of economic gain. According to Sutherland the term
‘professional’, when applied to a criminal, refers to the following four things:
the pursuit of crime as a regular normal occupation, the development of skilled
techniques, careful planning, and status among criminals. It is on the basis of
factors like these that the professional criminal is differentiated from the
occasional criminal, the amateur criminal, and the unskilled criminal.
Professional criminals who commit crime as a regular business use techniques
which have been developed over a long period of time and transmitted to them
through personal association.

30
White Collared Offenders
White collared offenders are those who enjoy a very prestige, fame and status in
the society. Sutherland defines white-collar crime as a crime committed by
persons of high social status in course of their occupation. eg-
misrepresentation through fraudulent advertisement, infringement of patents,
copyrights, and trade-marks, a publication of fabricated balance sheets and
profit and loss account of business, etc. Sutherland further pointed out that
white-collar crime is more harmful to society than ordinary crimes because the
financial loss to the society from white-collar crime is far greater than the
financial loss from burglaries, robberies, larcenies, etc.

31
Criminal Tribes
The term was coined by the British to identify the most aggressive breed of nomadic
criminals who were known as thugs. The idea of labelling them as criminal tribes
was to provide them with a permanent dwelling place and help uplift their socio-
economic background. During the British period, several sub-communities such as
Ghantichors, Uchales, Thugs and Pendharis were involved in thefts, dacoity and
other illegal activities. Their nuisance was very widespread which led to enactment
of the Criminal Tribes Act 1871. The castes and tribes "notified" under the Act were
labelled as Criminal Tribes for their so-called "criminal tendencies". As a result,
anyone born in these communities across the country was presumed as a "born
criminal", irrespective of their criminal precedents. This gave the police sweeping
powers to arrest them, control them, and monitor their movements. Once a tribe was
officially notified, its members had no recourse to repeal such notices under the
judicial system. From then on, their movements were monitored through a system of
compulsory registration and passes, which specified where the holders could travel
and reside, and district magistrates were required to maintain records of all such
people.
32
Situational Offenders
A situational offender is a person who commits crimes only when in an environment
which permits or encourages those acts.
Following the classical study of Martin R. Haskell and Lewis Yablonsky Criminology -
Crime and Criminality (1974), a situational offender, as opposed to a career criminal, is
a person who committed a crime under certain circumstances, but normally is not
inclined to commit crimes and is unlikely to repeat the offense.
However, the term "situational offender" can be gravely misleading since almost all
crimes are situational. In other words, in almost every crime it is not sufficient to have a
predisposed offender. There must also be a target which tempts or provokes the
individual, and there must be the absence of restraining features such as a capable
guardian, or physical security.
A situational sex offender is one whose offense is associated with situational sexual
behavior, i.e., sexual behavior different from the person's usual habits. This term is in an
opposition to the preferential offender, whose offense is associated with the person's
preferential behavior. For example, a preferential child molester is exclusively involved
with children, whereas the situational ones are normally engaged in sexual behavior
within their peer group. 33
Women Offenders
Studies suggest that women have long history of committing different crimes.
Significant growth has been observed from 1945 onwards. Women's participation in
crime has been majorly associated with a large amount of indifference compared to men.
Generally crimes committed by women differ from male criminality. The differences can
be seen in the nature of the crime, and its consequences, combined with the method,
crime weapon, and choice of victim. It is difficult to overlook the fact that crimes
committed by women have a more emotional characteristic then those committed by
men.
Theorists who emphasise the biological and psychological factors that contribute to
female crime typically assume that criminal women have masculine biological and
psychological orientations. Cesare Lombroso proposes that "criminals are atavistic
throwbacks, and crime results from a reversion to their more primitive state." He
examined the skulls and bones of female criminals and prostitutes, as well as the lives of
both criminal and non-criminal women.

34
'The Female Offender,' which 'profiled' the female offender and included deception,
cunning, and spite, among other traits that they claimed were not present in males. This
suggests that criminal women were more male genetically than non-criminal females,
and thus biologically abnormal. One of Lombroso's many critics, Gabriel Tarde, stated
that crime, being social in nature, is of changing nature and, because it depends on social
definitions, it cannot be explained with reference to origins. Furthermore, Tarde claims
that Lombroso's theory does not explain the lower rate of criminality among women
with the same stigma.
Why do women commit crimes?
The norms and ideals of our society are complex. The gender role structure is no
different. These 'roles' have persisted for millennia. In the early years, we are instructed
on the differences between male and female behaviour. Boys are conditioned to take the
initiative and be manly, while girls are conditioned to take the back seat and be
feminine. Women are socialised from a young age to adhere to certain gender norms.
Women are taught proper behaviour even if males pose a greater threat to society.

35
Young Offenders
A young offender or juvenile offender is a person who has been convicted or
cautioned for a criminal offence. A Juvenile Delinquent is one who repeatedly commits
crime. These juvenile delinquents sometimes have mental disorders/behavioural issues
such as post traumatic stress disorder or bipolar disorder, and are sometimes diagnosed
with conduct disorder partially as a result of their delinquent behaviours.
Criminal youths or young offenders may further be classified as:
i) Pseudo criminals: Those who may commit a criminal act but are not seriously
out of social control. Their criminality is only incidental to the central
problem they represent, namely, failure of society at large.
ii) Amoral criminals: Those who have somehow failed to internalise and fully
accept the moral principles of their socially-oriented families and sub-culture.
iii) Real criminals: Those who have imbibed criminal values and do not suffer
from any guilt-feeling when violating the law.
It is important to find out the various causes for youth crimes or crimes committed
by young offenders.
36
Causes of Juvenile Delinquency
1. Adolescence Instability
2. Disintegration of Family System
3. Economic condition and Poverty
4. Migration
5. Sex Indulgence
6. Modern Life Style

37
 Organized Crimes

The most obvious distinction between organized crime and other forms of
criminal conduct is that it is "organized." In general terms, it does not include
random, unplanned, individual criminal acts. Instead, it focuses exclusively on
planned, rational acts that reflect the effort of groups of individuals. Several
efforts have been made to elicit common elements to describe and define
organized crime with greater specificity.

38
Characteristics of Organized Crime:
1. In organized crime there is a group of persons of considerable size which engage
themselves in continuous crimes over a long, usually indefinite period.
2. It tends to dominate, through political cloud or corruption, the law enforcement
agencies.
3. The organization is generally highly centralized; The authority is vested in one or
just a few members of the group.
4. Functioning of the mafia in the US has been linked to the working of corporations
and big business houses. There is division of labor, delegation of duties and
responsibilities and the specialization of functions. Like any modern business,
organized crimes also involved careful planning, risk insurance and have expansive
and monopolistic tendencies.
5. Criminal organizations adopt measures to protect the group and to guard against the
prevention of their activities. To this end, arrangements are made with doctors,
lawyers, policemen, judges, politicians and government officials.

39
Types of Organized Crimes:
Organized crimes is generally classified into following three major types:
1. Criminal Gangs
2. Syndicated Crime
3. Racketeering

40
Organized Criminal Gangs
Organized criminal gangs are a significant concern for a variety of organizations.
When you consider that organized criminal gangs, which include the stereotypic
mafia, Chinese triads, Japanese yakuza, Eastern European mafia, and drug cartels,
want to make as much money as possible, you can assume that they will turn their
attention to any profitable criminal venture. This includes computer-based crimes,
which can have a very high payback for little investment.
These gangs involve themselves in kidnapping, rape, mugging, extortion, robbery,
vehicle theft, drug peddling etc. When under pressure or duress of being caught,
gangsters do not hesitate to kill the victim for the fear of their identity being
disclosed. With the increasing unemployment and the desire to earn the quick
buck, certain small gangs specialize in particular type of criminal activity that
would help them gain expertise while committing the crime.

41
Syndicated Crime
Syndicated Crime is carried out by an organized criminal gang and is often called mafia.
The major influential mafias operate in metros like Mumbai, Kolkata and Delhi. It is not
very difficult to assess the prevalence of organized crimes in India. The number of such
crimes has increased substantially and has covered large geographical areas. Betting,
drug trafficking, automobile theft and supply of illegal arms to insurgents are some
commonplace examples. The members of the gangs of Abu Salem, Dawood Ibrahim,
Tiger Memon are all hard-core criminals who have set up a whole organized structure of
crime with a complete bureaucratic order. To burst such criminal activities, The Central
Economic Intelligence Bureau was set up in July, 1985.

Racketeering
The term racketeering broadly refers to criminal acts, typically those involving
extortion, that involve a "racket". A racket, being some sort of scheme organized to
extract illegal profits. Racketeering, often associated with organized crime, is the act of
offering of a dishonest service (a "racket") to solve a problem that wouldn't otherwise
exist without the enterprise offering the service.
42
 The Schools of Criminology

Meaning of the ‘School of Criminology’

Edwin Sutherland pointed out that a school of criminology 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”.
Therefore, a school of criminology implies the following three important points:
1. The adherents of each school try to explain the causation of crime and criminal
behaviour in their own way relying on the theory propounded by the exponent of
that particular school.
2. Each school of criminology suggests punishment and preventive measures to suit its
ideology.
3. And, each of the school represents the social attitude of people towards crime and
criminal in a given time. 43
Pre-classical School

The pre-classical school is commonly known as the demonological school for the
sole reason that during the 17th century, the demonological theory flourished in
Europe with the dominance of the church and religion. Since during this time, the
scientific explanation was not given preference and, concept of crime was vague
and based on superstitions and myths.
Hence, the explanations for criminal behaviour were sought through spirits,
demons and unknown power.
The principle behind such a concept was that a man commits a crime due to the
stimulus of some external force or an evil spirit which is beyond the control and
understanding of man and that he was possessed by such a spirit. The wrath of
God and the natural agencies were considered to give punishment to the offenders.
The offenders were subjected and had to go through battles, pelting of stones and
was believed that no harm would be caused if the offender was innocent which
was termed as the Ordeal test and was a method of torturing or subjecting the
44
offender to severe torture to determine whether or not such an offender was guilty
of the offence which he was charged with.
The justification advanced for these rituals was the familiar belief that "when the
human agency fails, recourse to divine means of proof becomes most! inevitable".
However, such practices were the most irrational according to the modern mind,
they were universally accepted.
This demonological theory of criminality or the pre-classical was based upon the
omnipotence of spirit, which they regarded as a divine and superior power. The
offender was made victim to the worships, sacrifices and ordeals by water and fire
which were usually prescribed to determine the guilt of the offender. However, as
the times developed people started analysing and questioning the demonological
theory which led to the scientific development and therefore, led to the formation
of the classical school of criminology.

45
Classical School

The pioneers and the scholars of the classical school of criminology are Cesare
Beccaria, Jeremy Bentham and Romilly. The main belief of this school is that all
men are self-seeking and therefore they attempt to commit the offence on account of
the free will and not on account of being possessed by an evil spirit. According to
the theory of this school, men possess free will and therefore, act as per their
pleasure and in order to cause pain (hedonism) to the victim. The theory devised by
the pre-classical school was rejected.
Beccaria, a renowned criminologist proposed that, the punishment of a crime that is
decided should be proportionate and in accordance with its seriousness. This thought
was based on the simple reason that torture was inappropriate and thus allowed the
weak to incriminate and the strong would be found innocent before the adjudication
because of social position. The ideology of Beccaria was supported by various
criminologists that emphasizes upon the criminal rather than the crime.

46
The classical school focuses on the principle of deterrence instead of the retributive
theory.
The major drawback of the classical school was that it was based upon an abstract
presumption of free will and relied solely on the act (i.e., the crime) without devoting
any attention to the state of mind of the criminal or on the criminal. Another
shortcoming of this school was that they prescribed equal punishments for same
offence and created no distinction between first offenders and habitual criminals
irrespective of the gravity of the offence. However, the greatest achievement of this
school of criminology lies in the fact that it recognized and suggested for the
development of a substantial and robust criminal policy which would overcome the
barrier of allotting arbitrary punishments. Due to the theory devolved by Beccaria the
earlier concepts of crime and criminals which were based on religious beliefs and
myths were denounced and therefore, the emphasis was upon the criminal rather than
the crime which eventually led to the need for concentrating on the personality of an
offender in determine the causation of crime.

47
Neo-classical School

The 'free will' theory developed by the classical school did not survive for too long
because of ignoring the individual differences under certain situations and treating
first offenders and the habitual alike irrespective of the crime committed. The neo-
classists asserted that certain categories of offenders such as minors, idiots, insane
or incompetent cannot be treated equally as a prudent man in matters of
punishment irrespective of the similarity of their criminal act because these
persons were incapable of understanding the nature or the conduct of the act
committed. The Neo-classical school was greatly appreciated because of evolution
of the theory of differentiating the aforementioned categories from the other
criminals on the basis of their mental depravity was indeed a progressive step.

48
Thus, it would be seen that the main contribution of neo-classical school of
criminology lies in the fact that the theory of classical school suggested that an
individual might commit criminal acts due to certain justifying circumstances and
such situations must be taken under consideration while discharging the criminal
liability.
Therefore, along with the criminal act, the other factors such as the, the personality of
the criminal, the motives, previous life, history, general character, etc., should not be
lost while assessing his guilt. Today’s jury system has inculcated the approach of the
Neo-classists by granting leniency to the aforementioned classes. As to the
shortcomings of neo-classical school of criminology, it believed that criminals are a
nuisance to the society and therefore, must be expelled.

49
Positivist School

The earlier schools focused on the crime rather than the criminal therefore, this
school was the beginning of a new era wherein the focus was on the criminal and the
various reasons leading to the causation of crime. The real cause of criminality lay in
anthropological features of the criminal which helps in demonstrating the
functioning of brain in order to establish a co-relationship between criminality and
the structure and functioning of brain. The main exponents of this school were three
eminent Italian criminologists, namely, Cesare Lombroso, Raffaele Garofalo and
Enrico Ferri and therefore, it is known as the Italian School of Criminology.
Lombroso conducted an intensive study of the physical characteristics of his patients
and later on of criminals, and he came to a definite conclusion that criminals were
physically inferior because of which they developed a tendency for inferior acts.

50
Lombroso’s theory devised that there were 3 kinds of criminals:
a) The Atavists or hereditary criminals. -Lombroso also termed them as born
criminals. In his opinion born-criminals could not refrain from committing crimes
because they aspect of criminality was hereditary in nature and he termed such a
class at the Atavists. He, therefore, considered these criminals beyond reformation.
b) Insane Criminals -the second category of criminals according to Lombroso
consisted of insane criminals who are unable to understand the nature and conduct
of their act on account of mental depravity or disorder.
c) Criminaloids -Lombroso devised the third category of criminals which were
deemed as criminaloids who had devised a physical criminal type and had a
tendency to commit crime in order to overcome their inferiority complex in order to
survive in the society. Even though, Lombroso’s theory was not accepted in the
earlier centuries but was widely appreciated however, with the focus being shifted
upon the criminal rather than the crime, the Atavist theory of Lombroso was
rejected upon the sole reason that no criminal is beyond reformation.

51
The major contribution of Ferri to the field of criminology is his theory of "Law of
Criminal Saturation". This theory presupposes that the crime is basically the produce
of three main factors: —
(1) Physical or geographical;
(2) Anthropological; and
(3) Psychological or social.

Thus, Ferri emphasized that criminal behaviour is an outcome of a variety of factors

which have effect upon such an offender and instigate him to commit a certain
offence. According to him social change, which is inevitable in a dynamic society;
results in disharmony, conflict and cultural variations but change cannot be avoided.

52
Ferri classified the criminals into 5 types mainly:
(1) born criminals;
(2) occasional criminals;
(3) passionate criminals;
(4) insane criminals; and
(5) habitual criminals.

He suggested an intensive programme of crime prevention and recommended a series

of measures for treatment of offenders and therefore, believed in the rehabilitation and
reformation of the criminal.

53
Raffaele Garofalo was one of the three main exponents of positive school of
criminology, he emphasized that lack of pity generates crimes against person
while lack of probity leads to crimes against property.
He placed criminals mainly into four categories, namely:
(1) murderers ;
(2) violent criminals who are affected by environmental influences such as
prejudices of honour, politics and religion;
(3) criminals lacking in sentiment of probity; and
(4) lascivious or lustful criminals who commit crimes against sex and
chastity.

54
Criticism of Positive School:
• Crime is an essential product of social organisation but initially positive
school was ignoring the sociological aspect of criminal behaviour.
• Work of positivists was not very statistically sophisticated. Conclusions
about real or significant differences between criminals and non-criminals
were in fact highly speculative.

55
 Difference between the Positive School and the Classical
School of Criminology
Positive School Classical School
• Positive School was established in the 19th Century, and • Classical School was established in the 18th Century, and
emphasized on scientific methods of study, and shifted attempted to reform the criminal justice system in order to
emphasis from retribution to corrective method of treatment. protect criminal against arbitrary discretion of Judges.
• Positive School rejected legal definition of crime, and • Classical School defined crime in legal terms.
preferred sociological definition of crime.
• The main exponents of classical school were Beccaria and
• The main exponents of Positive School were Lambroso, Bentham.
Ferri and Garofalo.
• Classical School places reliance on ‘free will’ theory as an
• Positive School explained crime in terms of biological explanation of crime.
determination.
• Classical School believed in deterrent and definite
• Positive School advocates treatment methods for criminals, punishment for each offence and equal punishment for all
instead of punishment. criminals committing the same crime.
• Positive School laid greater emphasis on personality of the • Classical School focused greater attention on crime, namely,
criminal. the act, rather than the criminal. 56
Clinical school

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
behavior of offenders in its proper perspective. According to the Clinical School
of criminology, the personality of the man is the combination of internal and
external factors; And the punishment should be depended upon the personality of
the offender. Clinical school takes into account variety of factors.

Prof. Gillin, remarked that the theory of modern clinical school on the side of
criminologists 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. This School of
criminology believes that the offenders are of two types, viz. –

57
• Those who respond favourably to correctional methods, such as, probation,
parole, reformation, open air camps, advice, etc., and
• Those who do not respond favourably to the correction methods. Such
criminals are incorrigible (cannot be improved), and should be inflicted with
punishment of imprisonment for life.
Thus, briefly speaking, individualization 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.

58
Geographical or Cartographic School

This school of criminology primarily considered crime as the expression of effect of

geography including the environment. It attempts to show the influence upon behaviour of
such factors as climate, topography, natural resources and geographical locations.
According to this school, crime is closely connected with geography, climate, environment
which includes humidity, temperature, etc.

The main exponents of this school were Quetlet and Guery. According to this school,
particular crimes are committed in the particular area only. It has been observed by them
that, commission of crime against human body is rampant in warm season, and commission
of crime against property is more prevalent in cold season. The number of crimes that they
noticed, are comparatively more in barren land than in the fertile one.

59
As propounded by Quetlet and Guerry the law is known as Thermic law, according to which
certain crimes are so linked with geographical conditions that these occur in a particular
climate at a particular area. According to Montesque, the rate of crime is high in areas near
the equator. Lombroso’s investigation on this phenomenon of crime discovered that the
incidence of crime is less in plains, as compared with rocky lands, plateaus and valleys.

Criticism to Geographical or Cartographical School:

It does not take into account other factors responsible for commission of crime.
It does not take into consideration the fact that, even in an ideal environment the crimes are
equally committed.
It does not take into consideration that, mental and physical set up of the individual is also
instrumental in making a person criminal.

60
Sociological School

This school offers a sociological explanation of crime. An attempt is made to establish

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

The sociological approach is concerned with effects of group patterns of behaviour, as

well as the social status, the role the individual plays in the society, and the
individual’s conceptions of it, and of various other types of social situations and
relationships. The sociological school focuses on how factors such as neighbourhood
characteristics, community cohesion, and social control can influence crime rates. The
sociological school emphasizes the importance of social bonds, such as family, school,
and community, in preventing crime. It argues that individuals with strong social
bonds are less likely to engage in criminal activities. 61
Sutherland held the view that crime is basically a learned activity. It is only by
association with criminals that one learns the nature of crimes and its modus operandi.
No one invents crime it has to be learnt and its techniques mastered. This learning and
training one receive by associating with the group of criminals. According to D. R.
Taft social disorganization is at the root of all crimes. By disorganization it is meant
that there is a breakdown of the traditional social structure, rejection of old values and
loosening of social control upon human behaviour.

62
Socialist school

This school is the extension of the general theory of economic factors contributing to
the criminal behaviour. The main exponents of this School of Criminology are, Karl
Marx, Engel and Bonger. According to this School, all human actions and activities are
influenced and determined by the economic reason or cause. Fluctuation in the
commission of crime is closely linked with the fluctuations in the economic conditions.
Therefore, according to this School, true causes of crime are the economic inequalities.
Due to these economic inequalities, the society is divided into different classes and there
is constant tension between these classes. Bonger also believed that economic
conditions are the root cause of the criminal activities. The philosophy of capitalism is
an attempt to legitimize the self-seeking acquisitiveness and aggressive pursuit of
money and power. These tendencies lead to criminal activity.

63
It can be described as economic theory because it examines how economic disparities,
poverty, unemployment, and lack of opportunities can influence individuals’ behaviour
and their likelihood of engaging in criminal activities. It argues that crime is a result of
economic factors, such as economic inequality, deprivation, and lack of access to
resources.

Though the socialist theory of crime has the definite merit of pinpointing an important
factor in the production of crime, it is false to assign exclusive responsibility for the
crime either to economics or geography or pleasure or culture. Actually, all factors have
their relevance to an adequate and comprehensive theory of crime.

Criticism to Socialistic School:

• The basis of Socialist school of Criminology is the Marxism theory, though it is good
and acceptable, unfortunately, it has now been falsified.
• It is doubtful that the crime would be totally absent in the classless society.
• It does not consider all causes of crime, except the economic cause.
64
Aristotle’s four laws of Association
Associationism is the theory that the mind is composed of elements usually referred to as
sensations and ideas which are organized by means of various associations. Although the
original idea can be found in Plato, it is Aristotle who gets the credit for elaborating on it.
Aristotle counted four laws of association when he examined the processes of remembrance
and recall:

1. The law of contiguity. Things or events that occur close to each other in space or time
tend to get linked together in the mind. If you think of a cup, you may think of a saucer; if
you think of making coffee, you may then think of drinking that coffee.

2. The law of frequency. The more often two things or events are linked, the more
powerful will be that association. If you have an eclair with your coffee every day, and
have done so for the last twenty years, the association will be strong indeed -- and you will
be fat.

65
3. The law of similarity. If two things are similar, the thought of one will tend to trigger
the thought of the other. If you think of one twin, it is hard not to think of the other. If
you recollect one birthday, you may find yourself thinking about others as well.

4. The law of contrast. On the other hand, seeing or recalling something may also trigger
the recollection of something completely opposite. If you think of the tallest person you
know, you may suddenly recall the shortest one as well. If you are thinking about
birthdays, the one that was totally different from all the rest is quite likely to come up.

66
 Causation of Crime

Criminologists have always differed in their views regarding crime causation.

Continental criminologists often support the endogenous theory of criminality which
is founded on the bio-physical consideration of criminals.
American criminologists, on the other hand, are more inclined to explain criminality
in terms of social factors. They believe that criminals differ from non-criminals in
certain traits of their personality which develops unusual tendencies in them to commit
crime under situations.
It is thus clear that the subjective aspect of crime causation includes the biological,
anthropological, physiological and psychiatric study of the offender as against the
objective approach which insists on analysis of the socio-economic, ecological,
topographical and cultural environment under which crimes usually generate.
67
Heredity and Crime

Lombroso was the first criminologist to correlate crime with the heredity of the
criminal.
His influence on contemporary criminologists was so great that they also accepted
Lombroso's view that heredity was the sole cause of the criminal behaviour of the
offender.
Lombroso asserted that there are certain criminals who imbibe criminality by
birth.
He called them atavists and held that such criminals were incorrigibles. He
attributes this atavistic tendency to them due to hereditary influences.
Modern research has however shown that hereditary influences have little effect
on criminality. To dispel this view it may further be pointed out that certain races,
clans, or tribes such as gipsies in western Europe are known to have indulged in
criminality for generations.

68
In India, the Kanjars and Lohars of Rajasthan and Baluchis the nomadic tribes which
habitually pursue criminal traits and take criminality as a mode of life.
The tribal offences committed in Adivasi and tribal areas in India deserve special
mention here. They are mostly due to superstitious belief in witchcraft, petty quarrels,
sexual indulgence and intoxication due to excessive consumption of liquor, especially
in festive seasons. Thus it would not be correct to attribute criminality in tribals to
hereditary factors.
Studies carried on by Goring, Healy, Sheldon and Glueck on hereditary as factors of
crime causation indicate that it is difficult to establish any possible co-relation between
heredity and criminal behaviour because it is practically impossible to isolate heredity
factors from other environmental factors.
It is significant to note that even Lombroso at a later stage modified his earlier views and
suggested that only one-third of all criminals by nature are criminals type. He also
classified criminals into four types, namely:
• Idiots
• Imbeciles
• Feeble Minded Criminals
• Morally Insane Criminals 69
Bio-physical factors & criminality

Biological differences in human personality also account for criminality in human

beings.
The logic behind the biological explanation of crime is that structure determines
function and persons behave differently owing to the fact that they are somehow
structurally different.
Physical and biological abnormalities are generally responsible for criminal
behavior. In other words, the criminal is viewed as a biological organism
characteristically different, abnormal, defective and inferior, both biologically and
physiologically.

70
The genetic or biological theory of crime states that criminal behavior is inherited
and they are different from innocent physically and biologically including
glandular malfunctioning, racial heritage, moral insensitivity, etc. This theory is an
improved version of the atavists theory.
An American criminologist Dr Caldwell showed keen interest in phrenology and
published his ‘elements of phrenology’ in 1824. The doctrine underlined three basic
proportions:
• The exterior of the skull conforms to the inferior, and to the shape of the brain
• The mind consists of faculties
• These faculties are related to the brain and skull

Dr. Caldwell emphasised that sentiments control the propensities and are aided by
will to govern the whole conduct or act of a person. Thus, ‘will’ and ‘spirit’ were
supreme in controlling the human behaviour. The theory has, however, been
disapproved being purely hypothetical in nature and has now fallen into disuse.
71
Mental Disorder and Criminality

The term “mental disorder” is also referred to as mental abnormality. It denotes that the
mind is in a state of confusion or in some disease.
Studies have shown that there is no evidence to prove that the crimes committed by
criminals were induced by their mental disorders.
On the contrary, crime statistics showed that quite a large number of criminals were
persistent offenders and more than 66 % of them had a past criminal record and 44% of
them had previously been in prison undergoing a sentence.
Be that as it may, the law does take mental illness or insanity into account while
determining the criminal liability of the offender.
It is also taken into account in sentencing offenders where they are subjected to clinical
treatment rather than being sentenced. Insanity has been recognised as a defence in most
penal laws.
In the Indian penal code, section 84 mentions that – Act of a person of unsounded mind
– Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason
of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is
doing what is either wrong or contrary to law. 72
M'Naughten Rules: Daniel M'Naghten suffered from paranoia. He always felt that
everyone was his enemy and one of them was Prime Minister, Sir Robert Peel. He was
very much convinced that the Prime Minister wanted to kill him. Daniel decided to kill
him but instead killed Peel's secretary by mistake M'Naghten was acquitted on the
ground of insanity. The judgment was not favoured by everybody though following
rules were cited that are the basis of defence on the ground of insanity in England, India
and the U.S.A.
1. Everyone is presumed sane until the contrary is proved.
2. A person can resort to this defence when he is incapable of knowing the nature and
quality of his act or the knowledge of what is right or wrong.
3. If a man commits a criminal act under insanity, he is under the same degree of
responsibility as he would have been on the facts as he imagined them to be.

73
The said rules were criticized on the following grounds
1. The rules are very vague, ambiguous and unscientific.
2. The rules ignore the influence and impact of emotions, unconscious- ness and
willingness during the commission of a criminal act. The rules are solely concerned
with the 'right and wrong' test without any rationality
3. The meaning of the words 'quality' and 'wrong' are not clearly defined which makes
it debatable as to whether they are to be construed in legal or in the moral sense.
4. The rules are focusing only on the extreme cases of insanity re when there is a
complete impairment of the cognitive faculties making a very rigid distinction that
either a person is sane or insane. It is not easy to specifically distinguish a person
and categorize his offence by following this rule.

74
5. IRRESISTIBLE IMPULSE: The rule was criticized on the ground that the mental
illness may affect not only the cognitive faculties of the offender but also his will
and emotions. An individual is not criminally responsible under the irresistible
impulse test, though he may be under the M'Naghten Rules if he had a mental
disease that kept him from controlling his conduct despite his knowledge of the
nature and quality of his act and his awareness that it was wrong It was held that
such a test would let the doors of immunity too wide open and also that the test does
not go far enough to extend the M'Naghten Rules. It is not possible to prove whether
an impulse was 'irresistible' or not. However, irresistible test has been accepted in
some jurisdictions in the U.S.A. and Australia.
Several other instances of irresistible impulses are observed in cases are
1. Pyromania 5. Pathological Arson
2. Kleptomania 6. Incest
3. Insanity 7. Epilepsy
4. Neurosis 8. Fear

75
Freuds Theory of Criminal Behavior

Psychodynamic trait theory was developed by Sigmund Freud in the late1800s and
has become an effective approach in the history of crime studies (Siegel, 2005).
According to Freud, the childhood experiences shape the future interpersonal
relationships of people.
Freud's psychodynamic concept, which categorizes people into an id, an ego, and
just a super-ego, became the basis for the first research theories on criminal habit.
The id was used to define our innate motivations that stem from our biology. The
ego refers to the logical and aware part of oneself that acts as a buffer between the
irrational impulses of the id as well as the controlling tendencies of the super-ego.
The "super-ego" comprises the limits placed on one's actions by one's family out of
adoration and devotion and is developed in childhood. The inability to build secure
relationships with one's family was a major factor in criminal conduct.

76
Id
First, there is the supposedly primal id, which feeds our unconscious needs for
hunger and sex. The id motivates people to act on their baser instincts, no matter
how misguided they may be. When a hungry baby screams, it is the id trying to
fulfill its wants.

Ego
The ego provides the necessary restraint to prevent people from giving in to every
id-generated urge. This part makes the idea of real work redirecting inappropriate
sexual and violent desires into appropriate ones. The ego is a learned habit. The id,
according to Freud, is innate to every person. According to Freud, this id is crucial to
the development of one's character; for instance, the id permits a baby to have its
wants satisfied via wailing. The id is just concerned with gratifying itself; it will do
anything that brings it satisfaction, no matter how negative the circumstance.

77
Super-ego
The second part of the psyche is the super-ego, where consciousness resides. In
Freud's theory, the super-ego comprises a human's ingrained principles and ideals.
The id, as well as the ego, combine to form the giant ego. It aids in making one feel
good about either a positive action or bad about a negative one. The fourth
personality feature is the mind, often called the consciousness, which aids in dealing
with the world by mediating between the id and super-ego.

78
Freuds Theory of Criminal Behavior

The conscious mind

with the ego at its helm
is the visible tip of the
iceberg. Beneath the
surface, the larger
unconscious realm
houses the primal
instincts of the id and
the moral compass of
the superego, steering
our actions and reactions
in subtle and complex
ways.
79
Psychological concept of crime

Psychology includes within it the study of mind and behaviour attitudes etc. It is the
study of individual characteristics such as personality, reasoning, perceptions,
intelligence, imagination, memory creativity and so on.
Psychologists treat crime as a behaviour learnt by the criminal in course of his
contact with different persons. Like sociologists, they seek to explain crime in terms
of environmental circumstances.

80
 Differential Association Theory

In criminology, differential association is a theory developed by Edwin Sutherland

(1883–1950) proposing that through interaction with others, individuals learn the
values, attitudes, techniques, and motives for criminal behaviour. Differential
association theory is the most talked-about of the learning theories of deviance. This
theory focuses on how individuals learn to become criminals, but it does not concern
itself with why they become criminals.

Sutherland proposed differential association theory in 1939 and modified it in 1947.

Initially, he applied his theory only to systematic criminal behaviour, but, later on,
extending his theory, he applied it to all criminal behaviour. Sutherland forwarded
mainly two explanations for criminal behaviour: situational and genetic or historical.

The former explains crime on the basis of situation that exists at the time of crime, and
the latter explains crime on the basis of a criminals life experiences. He himself used the
second approach in developing his theory of criminal behaviour. 81
If a hungry boy comes across a restaurant and finds the owner absent, he steals a loaf of
bread.

In this case, the boy steals not because the restaurant owner was absent and he himself
was hungry but because he had learnt earlier that one could satisfy ones hunger by
stealing things. Thus, it is not the situation which motivates a person to commit a theft;
it is his learnt attitudes and beliefs.

Sutherlands main thesis (Principles of Criminology, Philadelphia, 1947) is that

individuals encounter many inharmonious and inconsistent social influences in their
lifetime and many individuals become involved in contacts with carriers of criminalistic
norms and as a consequence become criminals. He called this process differential
association.

Definition- Differential association theory suggests that criminal behaviour is learned

through communication and association with other criminals/delinquents, where
techniques and methods are learnt, as well as new attitudes and motives to commit a
crime. 82
Sutherland’s differential association theory of crime proposes nine critical factors in
how a person becomes an offender:

1. Criminal behaviour is learned. It assumes that we are born with a genetic

predisposition, drives, and impulses, but the direction in which these go must be
learned.
2. Criminal behaviour is learned through interactions with others through
communication.
3. The learning of criminal behaviour takes place in intimate personal groups.
4. Learning includes techniques for committing the crime and the specific direction of
motives, drives, rationalisations, and attitudes (to justify criminal activity and steer
someone toward that activity).
5. The specific direction of motives and drives is learned by interpreting legal norms as
favourable or unfavourable (how people with whom someone interacts view the
law).

83
6. When the number of interpretations favourable to breaking the law exceeds the
number of interpretations unfavourable (through more contact with people who
favour the crime), a person becomes a criminal. Repeated exposure increases the
likelihood of becoming a criminal.
7. Differential associations may vary in frequency (how often a person interacts with
criminal influencers), duration, priority (age at which criminal interactions are first
experienced and strength of influence), and intensity (prestige to people/groups with
whom someone is associated).
8. Learning criminal behaviour through interactions with others is the same as for any
other behaviour (e.g., observation, imitation).
9. Criminal behaviour expresses general needs and values; however, those needs and
values do not explain it. Since non-criminal behaviour also expresses the same
needs and values, no distinction exists between the two behaviours. Anyone can
become a criminal, essentially.

84
Sutherland's theory of differential association and individual criminality has been critised
on three main grounds, namely,-
(1) It is incorrect to say that persons become criminals because of their association with
criminal behaviour patterns. If that were so, everyone in contact with criminals would
adopt or follow criminality, which is not true.
(2) There may be cases when a person learns criminal behaviour patterns from non-
criminals and non-criminal behaviour patterns from criminals. The theory of
differential association takes no notice of this factual situation. This may be illustrated
by an illustration. If a mother teaches her son that he should always be honest as
'honesty is the best policy' but at the same also teaches him (perhaps inadvertently),
that "it is all right to steal a loaf of bread when you are starving to death", she is
presenting him with an anti-criminal behaviour pattern and a criminal behaviour
pattern, simultaneously, even if she is herself honest and non-criminal, and even anti-
criminal.
(3) The theory fails to answer as to why persons have the associations they associate with,
whether criminal or non-criminal. In fact, it is differential opportunities for
associations which are characterised as criminal patterns, that account for making a
person criminal. 85
Multiple factor approach of crime causation

(1) Mobility:
The rapid growth of industrialisation and urbanisation in recent years has led to expansion
of means of communication, travel facilities and propagation of views through press and
platform. Consequently, human interaction has gone beyond intimate associations with
increased chances of mobility. Migration of persons to new places where they are
strangers offers them better opportunities for crime as the chances of detection are
considerably minimised. Mobility, therefore, serves as a potential cause of social
disorganisation which may result in deviant behaviour due to lack of family control.

Commenting on the impact of crime reports appearing in newspapers on criminality,

Barnes & Teeters observed that it encourages crime and delinquency in two ways. Firstly,
those with unstable mind and psychopaths are easily attracted towards such crimes; and
secondly, with the frequent reporting of crime-news, people begin to lose faith in law and
law-enforcement agencies. That apart, the deviants learn new techniques of crime through
crime-news which are published in newspapers or magazines.
86
(2) Culture Conflicts:
In a dynamic society social change is an inevitable phenomenon. The impact of
modernisation, urbanisation and industrialisation in modern dynamic society may
sometimes result in social disorganisation and this may lead to culture conflicts between
different sections of society. The difference may be between old and new values, local and
imported values and traditional values and the government imposed values.

The inability of local communities to appreciate the common values of their residents or
solve commonly experienced problems causes tension leading to deviant behaviours. This
is how criminal traditions get embedded into the functioning of a community and they co-
exist alongside conventional values.

Sutherland has termed this phenomenon as “differential social disorganisation” which is

more common with lower-class neighbourhoods. He attributes three main causes for the
culture conflict, namely, (1) residential instability; (2) social or ethnic heterogeneity; and
(3) poverty.

87
The shift of population due to migration or immigration quite often affects the crime rate
of a given place. The culture conflict between inhabitants and immigrants results in
deviant behaviour. In a recent study Ruth and Cavan found that Eskimos who were free
from the problem of crime until recently, now frequently indulge into deviant behaviour
such as, loitering, drunkenness and sex-offences due to their migration to urban areas and
social contact with non-Eskimos.

The immigration problem which India faced during Indo-Pak partition days in 1947 and
Bangladesh partition in 1971 serves as an interesting illustration of cultural conflicts
arising out of social disorganisation. The inflood of refugees from Sindh and North-West
Frontier region in 1947 completely broke down the traditional social structure of Indian
society and resulted into enormous increase in crime.

The incidence of murder, arson, looting, kidnapping and rioting were necessarily an
outcome of socio-cultural variations in immigrants who had developed highly
individualistic tendencies due to disruption of their family life and loss of status.
88
(3) Family Background:
Sutherland holds that out of all the social processes, the family background has perhaps the
greatest influence on criminal behaviour of the offender. The reason being that children spend
most of their time with their parents and relatives within the family. Children are apt to
imbibe criminal tendencies, if they find their parents or members of the family behaving in a
similar manner.
It is through the institution of family that the child unconsciously learns to adjust himself to
the environment and accepts the values of life such as respect for others, faithfulness,
trustworthiness and co-operation through his own life experiences. It therefore follows that a
child brought up in a broken family is likely to fall an easy prey to criminality.
Lack of parental control over children due to death, divorce or desertion of parent or their
ignorance or illness may furnish soothing ground for the children to resort to criminal acts.
Again, frequent quarrels amongst parents, undue domination of one over the other, step-
motherly treatment with children, frequent births in the family, immorality of parents, misery,
poverty or unwholesome family atmosphere and the like may also lead to the neglect of child
and finding no adequate outlet for his talents, he/she may tend to become criminal in his/her
life. To add to the above list, unemployment, low income or parent’s continued long absence
from home for the sake of livelihood are some other causes for child delinquencies. 89
(4) Political Ideology:
It is well known that the Parliamentarians who are law-makers of the country are also
politicians. They succeed in mobilising public opinion in the desired way through the media
of press and platform and finally enact suitable laws to support their policies. Thus, political
ideologies gain strength through legislative process thereby directly influencing the criminal
patterns in a given society.

The liberalisation of abortion law, imposition or withdrawal of prohibition laws, anti-dowry,

protection of women against domestic violence, prohibition on pre-natal sex-determination,
untouchability laws etc. are some of the examples to show as to how the concept of
criminality changes with the changed ideologies of the politicians and the government in
power.
Political leaders would tend to maintain their political parties financially sound and at the
same time ensure themselves and their families against the uncertainties of future. This led to
increasing nexus between politicians and organised criminals. This is followed by political
bureaucracy-organised crime nexus. Once politicians get involved, they become vulnerable
and there is continuous pressure on them to repeat the process.
90
(5) Religion and Crime:
The changes in religious ideologies also have a direct bearing on incidence of crime in a
particular region. It has been rightly said that morality can best be preserved in a society
through the institution of religion. The bond of religion keeps persons within their limits and
helps them to keep away from sinful and criminal acts.

Religious places in most parts of India have become dubious centres of vices. Cheating,
stealing, exploiting and kidnapping are too common in these places. The so-called
champions of the cause of religion, namely, the priests, the pujaris and Pandas of these
religious places are virtually the plunderers who do not hesitate to ransack the innocent
pilgrims. They consider themselves to be the agents of God and are in fact more dangerous
than the real criminals.

91
It is, therefore, necessary that public opinion should be mobilised against the superstitions
which are deep-rooted in Hindu religion and greater stress be laid on the spiritual aspect of
Dharma rather than the rituals and formalities insisted upon by the priests. This would help
in reducing crimes in pilgrim places in India. It is desired that the government must initiate
stringent measures to save these sacred places from becoming the centres of nefarious
activities of anti-social elements.

Despite the fact that all religions speak of communal harmony and peaceful co-existence,
most wars on this earth are fought in the name of religion. The war between Iran and Iraq for
over eight years, the wars in Lebanon, and the continuing fight between Catholics and
Protestants in Northern Ireland and even terrorist activities in India are being carried out in
the name of hidden religious overtones. These divisive forces contribute considerably to the
incidence of murder, mass killing, destruction of public and private properties and other anti-
social behaviour.

92
(6) Economic Conditions:
Economic conditions also influence criminality to a considerable extent. Present day
industrial progress, economic growth and urbanisation have paralysed the Indian domestic
life. The institution of family has disintegrated to such an extent that control of parents over
their wards has weakened thus leaving them without any surveillance.

Under the circumstances, those who lack self-control fall an easy prey to criminality. The
employment of women and their other outdoor activities have enhanced the opportunities for
sex crime. Again crimes such as hoarding, undue profiteering, black-marketing, etc., are
essentially an outcome of economic changes.

Now-a-days money is the paramount consideration to assess the social status of a person in
society. Crimes in higher circles of society can easily be wiped off through money.
Unemployment among the youths is yet another cause of increase in crime rate. If the
energies of these young persons are properly channelised, they can surely contribute to the
national man-power development.
93
It has been generally accepted that there is a strong relationship between criminality and
economic or income inequality as also between crime and unemployment. Rut poverty per se
is not the sole cause of criminality; it is only a major factor in crime causation. It is the social
disorganisation which accounts for criminality among the poorest and not their poverty.

Analysing the impact of economic conditions on criminality, Prof. Hermann Mannheim

observed that if we leave aside traffic offences, three-fourth of the time and energy of the
criminal law administrators of the world shall have to be devoted to economic crimes.

Focusing on the importance of economic factors in the causation of crime, he pointed out
that poverty contributes both directly and indirectly to the commission of crime. However,
poverty alone may not be a direct cause of crime because other factors such as frustration,
emotional insecurity and non-fulfilment of wants often play a dominant role in giving rise to
the criminal tendency.

94
The Marxist theory has emphasised that all human behaviour is determined by economic
factors. Supporting this view, Fredrick Engels attributed increase in the incidence of crime in
England in mid-eighteenth century to the deplorable economic condition of the workers due
to class exploitation. W.A. Bonger also adopted similar approach in explaining crime
causation and asserted that a criminal is a product of capitalistic system, which created
selfish tendencies.

In such a system, each person tries to extract maximum from others in return of the
minimum from himself. He identified many evils in the capitalistic system which were
responsible for generating crimes. In fact, the theory of Radical Criminology is based on this
concept which further explains that crime occurs due to the exploitation of the poor by the
rich.

95
(7) Ecology of Crime:
Ecology is the study of people and institutions in relation to environment. Topographical
conditions also affect the incidence of crime in a particular region or locality. After a series
of researches Enrico Ferri, the eminent Italian criminologist analysed the crime index of his
country and concluded that in the same country the crime rate varies considerably from one
region to another.

Some typical crimes are more peculiar to a particular region than other parts of the country.
Similar observations were made by criminologists in France, England and U.S.A. which
sufficiently established the influence of ecology on crime. It is well known that violation of
customs, excise and drug laws are more common in border areas and coastal regions than in
plains. Illegal felling of trees and violation of forest laws is an everyday occurrence in forest
regions.

96
In India, the impact of ecology on crime is apparently to be seen in dacoit-infested forest
regions and ravines of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh where opportunities for
escape and detection are plenty. Similarly, pilgrim places of India are the breeding ground
for all sorts of anti-social activities such as cheating, stealing, exploiting, etc. The cheats
operating in the guise of fortune-tellers and Sadhus are often the first rate criminals who
carry on their dubious activities right under the nose of the custodians of law in these so
called holy places.

The proponents of ecological theory attribute social disorganisation as the main cause of
criminality. They believe that treating or punishing the individual offenders would do little to
alleviate the problem and the solution is to be found in making efforts to stabilise the social
organisation and promoting community feeling, particularly among youths. As Durkheim
rightly put it, “the overall disorder and disorganisation, social and personal, shifts behaviour
in the direction of crime”.

97
The regional comparisons of crime rate in different parts of the country sufficiently indicate
that certain crimes are peculiar to a particular location. It can therefore, be inferred that
ecology of crime consists in the study of influences such as neighbourhood, population,
topographical factors, etc., on criminals considered from the point of view of location.

Commenting on this aspect, Donald Taft observed that “ecology of crime may be studied in
terms of location of criminal or residences of delinquents or some supposed influence upon
crime which has distribution in terms of space and topography”. He further observed that
criminals are often mobile and there seems to be a casual relationship between location of
delinquency and the criminal.

It may, however, be pointed out that ecology of crime need not be confused with the
proximity of crime and social conditions. The predominant consideration in the ecology of
crime is topographical conditions of different regions and their impact on causation of crime
peculiar to those places. Thus, ecology is undoubtedly one of the multiple factors of crime
causation.

98
(8) Influence of Media:
The importance of mass media in influencing human mind has been repeatedly emphasised
by some experts. Experience has shown that television and films have the maximum impact
on the viewers due to combined audio-visual impact. Most of serials or films shown on
television or cinema halls depict scenes of violence which adversely affect the viewers,
particularly the young boys and girls who often tend to imitate the same in their real life
situations.

The rising incidence of juvenile delinquency is essentially the result of evil effect of violence
and vulgarism and undesirable sex exposures depicted in movies or television. Likewise,
pornographic literature also has an unwholesome influence on the impressionable minds of
the youth which generates criminality among them.

99
Most criminologists believe that films and television are major contributors to violent
behaviour. A survey conducted by the Broadcasting Group of the House of Lords indicated
that exposure to media violence was closely linked with aggressive behaviour. But Hagell
and Newbury opposed the view that there was any real link between violent media images
and criminality after finding that persistent offenders watch films or television far less than
non-criminals. Gillin has also expressed doubt about any real link between media violence
and criminality. According to him, films, T.V. and other media teach methods of violence to
those who are already susceptible to them but it does not go further than that.

100
Conflict Theory of Crime
The propounders of conflict theory contend that conflict is inherent in all societies, may it
result from culture, race, gender, ethnicity or any other relationships. Conflict results from
competition for power among various groups or cultures.

Sellin wrote about his conflict theory in 1938 and asserted that culture conflict emanates
from conflict of conduct norms, where each separate culture sets out its own norms i.e. rules
of behaviour to be instilled into its members. In a homogeneous society these are enacted
into laws and followed by the members of that society because they consider them to be
right. However, where the society is heterogeneous, this does not occur and culture conflict
is bound to arise.

Vold has offered a very different view on the reason for conflict in the society. He is of the
opinion that people with similar interests and common ideology come together and form a
group. Those with dissimilar ideas may form a separate group. If these groups have similar
amount of strength, then the disagreements are resolved by compromise.

101
However, if one of these groups is stronger than the other, the former group would dominate
the weaker one, leading to conflict and generating a feeling of frustration and distrust. For
instance, the communal tensions between the Hindus and Muslims, or the activities of the
terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, LTTE etc. Hence, Vold perceives crime as a natural response
to an attack on the way of life of the deprived or weaker group.

The patterns of discrimination, injustice and exploitation are built into practices, and in
course of time assume the form of cultural pattern. The ideologies that defend the unjust
structures and patterns result into cultural violence, which is also called 'structural violence'.
For instance, the American Civil War of 1865,where the whole culture of slavery had to be
rejected or the struggle against apartheid in South Africa clearly shows how changes in
contemporary society are necessitated for new alternatives and new forms of life.

102
Briefly stated, the conflict theory suggests that 'structural' violence' is the outcome of
inflexibility and rigidity of the rules and practices in dealing with different races, classes or
cultures. Thus, conflict theory of crime suggests that structural violence and its effects are
manifested in the differential parameters of morality, morbidity and incarceration among
different groups or cultures

Conflict theory suggests that society is a relatively segmented and unstable system,
consisting of multiple of groups with somewhat destructive values, desires, needs,
aspirations etc. Each group wants to retain its identity and desires its existence
acknowledged by the society. Conflict among groups is therefore, inevitable. In this process,
the powerful groups gain and maintain control by manipulating social institutions including
the legal system. Thus, the criminal law expresses the values and interests of the powerful
and serves to counter the resistance of the powerless.

103