Crime refers to an act or omission punishable under any law that affects the public at large or society. Civil wrongs, on the other hand, are offenses that affect only an individual or a group of individuals. A crime is a public wrong against the state, and the prosecution is generally initiated by the government. Civil wrongs are private disputes in which the aggrieved party initiates legal proceedings to claim compensation or a remedy.
Crimes are usually more serious than civil wrongs. They involve a wrongful intention, and their prosecution is taken up by the state. Civil wrongs, in contrast, do not require wrongful intention for liability and can be resolved through compromise or settlement. Punishment for crimes may include imprisonment or death, while in civil wrongs, the remedy is usually compensation or damages.
Stages in the Commission of a Crime
Every crime progresses through a set of identifiable stages, each having its legal significance. The stages are intention, preparation, attempt, and accomplishment. These stages help determine the criminal liability of a person at any given point in the process.
Intention
Intention is the initial stage of committing a crime and signifies a person’s mental decision to commit an unlawful act. However, the law does not recognize mere intention as an offense. A person cannot be prosecuted solely based on their intention because it is challenging to prove what someone was thinking. Unless some overt act follows the intention, it cannot be treated as criminal conduct. For example, merely intending to kill someone does not constitute a crime. But intention is still a necessary ingredient for a crime, as it reflects the mental element behind the act.
Preparation
Preparation refers to the steps taken by a person to arrange the tools or plans necessary for the commission of a crime. Like intention, preparation in itself is not generally punishable. This is because it is often difficult to prove that the preparations were specifically for committing a particular crime. For example, if someone buys a weapon and loads it, intending to use it in a future crime, but takes no further steps, that person is still at the stage of preparation. The law does not consider this criminal unless there is additional evidence of direct action toward committing the offense.
Attempt
Attempt is the third stage in the commission of a crime and is punishable under criminal law. It refers to a direct movement toward completing a crime after preparations are made. An attempt is made when a person does something more than merely preparatory but falls short of the final act. The law recognizes an attempt as punishable even if the actual crime is not completed, especially when the offender has taken significant steps toward it. A person can be found guilty of an attempt even if, due to external circumstances, the crime could not be completed.
Accomplishment or Completion
The final stage in the commission of a crime is its accomplishment. If a person commits the crime, they are guilty of the actual offense. If they fail, they are liable for an attempt. For example, if a person fires a weapon intending to kill someone and the victim dies, it is murder. If the victim survives, the offender is guilty of attempted murder.
Punishable Preparations Under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Though generally not punishable, preparation is criminalized in some exceptional cases. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, includes provisions that make certain preparatory acts punishable. These exceptions include preparation to wage war against the government, commit depredation on foreign territories, commit dacoity, counterfeit currency or government stamps, and possess forged documents or false weights and measures. In these cases, the severity and threat posed by the preparation are deemed significant enough to attract legal consequences even before the attempt stage.
Distinction Between Motive and Intention
Motive and intention are different concepts in criminal law. Motive refers to the reason behind committing a crime, such as jealousy, revenge, or financial gain. Intention, however, is the deliberate decision to commit a criminal act. While motive can help explain why a person acted in a certain way, it is not sufficient to establish criminal liability. Intention is more relevant, as it indicates the conscious choice to break the law.
Motive is considered an underlying factor but does not determine guilt. Intention, however, is a core element in proving that a person acted with a guilty mind. For instance, a person who murders for insurance money may be said to have a motive, while the act of planning and executing the murder demonstrates intention.
Types of Punishments Under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, outlines several types of punishments that can be imposed on offenders. These include death, life imprisonment, imprisonment with hard labor (rigorous imprisonment), simple imprisonment, forfeiture of property, fine, and community service. These punishments are applied based on the severity and nature of the crime. Death is reserved for the most serious offenses. Life imprisonment implies confinement for the remainder of a person’s life. Community service is a relatively modern punishment designed to benefit society while disciplining the offender.
Difference Between Fine and Penalty
A fine is a sum imposed as punishment for committing a crime. It is penal and is imposed by a court of law after the conviction of an accused. A penalty, on the other hand, is generally imposed for non-compliance with legal obligations, and it may or may not involve a criminal offense. Fines are associated with offenses and are typically imposed as a result of a judicial process. Penalties may be imposed administratively for violations such as failing to file a return or submit a report.
For example, if a company violates provisions under the Companies Act by not rectifying its name, it may be fined. If it fails to comply with address display requirements, a penalty may be imposed. Fines are related to criminal liability, while penalties usually relate to regulatory or administrative breaches.
Fundamental Elements of Crime
For an act to constitute a crime, four essential elements must be present. These are a human being capable of committing a crime, mens rea or a guilty mind, actus reus or the criminal act itself, and injury to a person or society. These components form the framework for analyzing criminal behavior and determining legal responsibility.
Human Being
Only a human being can be held criminally responsible under current laws. While ancient legal systems sometimes punished animals for harmful acts, modern law attributes such responsibility to human actors. A person must be of sound mind and capable of understanding the consequences of their actions to be held liable.
Mens Rea
Mens rea, or guilty mind, is the intent behind committing a crime. It reflects the mental state of the accused at the time of the offense. The legal maxim actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea underscores that both the guilty act and guilty mind must coexist to constitute a crime. Without mens rea, a person cannot generally be held criminally liable.
Actus Reus
Actus reus refers to the physical act of committing a crime or an omission that results in a crime. It is the external manifestation of the internal guilty mind. Without an act or omission, the intention alone is not punishable. For criminal liability to arise, an overt act must be proven.
Injury
A crime must result in some form of injury to another person or society. This injury can be physical, mental, reputational, or financial. The law recognizes this harm as a crucial element in justifying the punishment of the offender. Without an injury, there may be no cause for criminal proceedings.
Distinction Between Mens Rea and Actus Reus
Mens rea refers to the mental element of a crime, while actus reus is the physical element. The former involves the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing, and the latter involves the actual conduct. A person may have a guilty mind but may not act on it, in which case there is no crime. Conversely, a person may act without a guilty mind, in which case the act may not attract criminal liability unless exceptions apply.
Forms of Mens Rea Under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Mens rea can take several forms, including intention, negligence, and recklessness. These forms reflect different degrees of culpability. Intention involves a deliberate desire to bring about a particular result. Negligence indicates carelessness or a failure to meet a standard of care. Recklessness means proceeding with a dangerous act while being aware of the risks involved. Each form has specific implications for criminal liability and punishment.
Intention
Intention is the most direct and explicit form of mens rea. It indicates a person’s decision to carry out an act to achieve a specific consequence. The presence of intention often leads to more severe punishment, as it reflects a high degree of moral blameworthiness.
Negligence
Negligence involves a failure to exercise reasonable care. It is a less blameworthy form of mens rea but can still result in criminal liability. Negligence is measured by the standard of a reasonable person. If someone’s carelessness results in harm, they may be held liable even if they did not intend the result.
Recklessness
Recklessness involves consciously taking an unjustified risk. It lies between intention and negligence in terms of blameworthiness. The person is aware of the risk but chooses to proceed anyway. This conscious disregard for the safety of others can result in criminal conviction and punishment.
Exceptional Cases Where Mens Rea Is Not Required in Criminal Law
Although mens rea is a fundamental element in most crimes, there are exceptions where criminal liability can be imposed without proving a guilty mind. These exceptions usually apply in situations involving public safety, regulatory compliance, or administrative violations.
Statutory Exclusion of Mens Rea
In some cases, a statute specifically excludes the requirement of mens rea. These statutes aim to ensure compliance with legal duties that protect public interest, such as regulations involving health, safety, and economic matters. In such instances, a person can be punished for violating the statute even if there is no intent to break the law. For example, many economic laws impose penalties for violations regardless of the offender’s intention.
Public Safety and Social Welfare
Certain offenses are treated with strict or absolute liability to protect public health and safety. These include offenses related to the environment, food safety, licensing, and hazardous substances. The rationale is that requiring proof of intention in such cases would make enforcement difficult and slow, defeating the very purpose of the law.
Speedy Disposal of Minor Offenses
In cases involving petty offenses or minor violations, proving mens rea may unnecessarily delay justice. Therefore, some laws permit penalties without requiring proof of a guilty mind. This approach helps in the quick resolution of cases where fines or warnings are sufficient remedies. These offenses typically involve minor infractions, such as parking violations or administrative oversights.
Strict Liability Offenses
Strict liability refers to legal responsibility for damages or violations regardless of fault or intent. In these cases, even if the accused did not intend to cause harm, they are held liable because of the inherent risk involved in their actions. For example, if a person maintains a hazardous business and an accident occurs, they may be held strictly liable, even without criminal intent.
Ignorance of the Law
Ignorance of the law is not considered a valid defense in criminal law. If a person commits an act that is prohibited by law, they cannot escape liability by claiming that they were unaware of the law. The legal principle supporting this is the maxim that ignorance of the law excuses no one. This rule ensures that all individuals are equally subject to the law, regardless of their knowledge.
Criminal Liability of Companies
Companies can no longer claim immunity from criminal liability on the basis that they lack a physical mind or body. Under modern legal interpretations, companies are treated as legal persons and can be held criminally liable through the actions and intentions of individuals who control or manage their operations. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita defines a person to include companies, associations, or bodies of persons.
Legal Person and Mens Rea
Even though a company does not possess a mind in the literal sense, courts attribute the mens rea of its directors or managers—referred to as the ‘alter ego’ of the company—to the legal entity. This doctrine ensures that companies do not evade accountability for offenses committed through corporate strategies or management decisions.
Judicial Recognition of Corporate Criminal Liability
In various court rulings, including those by Indian courts, it has been established that companies can be convicted of offenses requiring mens rea. If the crime committed by the company carries imprisonment and a fine as punishment, the courts may impose only the fine, acknowledging that imprisonment cannot be applied to a corporate body. However, the liability remains enforceable, and the fine can be substantial.
Offenses Under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, categorizes offenses into different types for procedural and penal purposes. This classification determines how the law enforcement agencies handle the crime and how the courts grant bail or initiate proceedings.
Difference Between Bailable and Non-Bailable Offenses
A bailable offense is one where bail is a matter of right. The accused can secure release by furnishing bail and does not require special permission from the court. Non-bailable offenses are more serious, and the grant of bail is discretionary, depending on the circumstances and severity of the case.
Bailable offenses are usually minor offenses such as rioting, unlawful assembly, or minor bribery cases. These are listed as bailable in the First Schedule of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. Non-bailable offenses include murder, culpable homicide, and counterfeiting, and usually involve imprisonment of three years or more, or even the death penalty.
The seriousness of the offense, whether it is cognizable or non-cognizable, and the prescribed punishment determine the bailability of the offense. In bailable offenses, the police can arrest the accused only with a warrant. In non-bailable offenses, arrest without a warrant is allowed.
Difference Between Cognizable and Non-Cognizable Offenses
Cognizable offenses are those for which a police officer can arrest a suspect without a warrant and begin an investigation without prior approval of the magistrate. These include serious crimes such as murder, dacoity, or kidnapping. In contrast, non-cognizable offenses require prior permission from a magistrate for arrest or investigation. These are less serious in nature,e cheating, forgery, or defamation.
The procedural difference is crucial. For cognizable offenses, law enforcement has more authority to act swiftly. For non-cognizable offenses, the accused has more protections, and legal proceedings move only with the court’s authorization.
Power of Courts to Pass Sentence
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, prescribes the sentencing powers of different courts, depending on the court’s rank and jurisdiction. Higher courts have broader powers, including the ability to impose the most severe punishments.
Sentencing Powers of High Courts and Sessions Judges
A High Court has unrestricted powers to pass any sentence authorized by law. This includes the death penalty, life imprisonment, and other severe punishments. A Sessions Judge or Additional Sessions Judge also holds the authority to pass any sentence, including death. However, a death sentence by a Sessions Judge requires confirmation by the High Court before it is executed.
Sentencing Powers of Magistrates
The Chief Judicial Magistrate can pass any sentence except for death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment exceeding seven years. A Magistrate of the first class can impose imprisonment of up to three years or a fine not exceeding fifty thousand rupees, or both, including an order for community service. A Magistrate of the second class can impose imprisonment of up to one year or a fine of up to ten thousand rupees, or both, and may also assign community service.
Concept of Community Service as Punishment
Community service is a new form of punishment provided under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. It involves assigning the offender to perform tasks beneficial to society, such as cleaning public areas, assisting in welfare programs, or working with municipal authorities. The punishment is designed to rehabilitate the offender and reduce prison overcrowding while still holding the individual accountable for their actions. The offender is not entitled to any payment for the service rendered under this form of punishment.
Determination of Sentence
While determining the appropriate sentence, courts consider several factors such as the gravity of the offense, the circumstances of its commission, the character of the offender, and the impact on the victim or society. Repeat offenders may receive more stringent punishments. First-time offenders may be eligible for lighter sentences or even probation, depending on the circumstances.
The sentencing must be proportionate to the offense and reflect both punitive and corrective objectives of the justice system. Courts are required to document reasons for granting leniency or imposing a harsh sentence to ensure transparency and accountability.
Trial by a Magistrate
When a case is instituted before a Magistrate, Section 238 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) comes into play. It states that when an accused appears or is brought before the Magistrate in a warrant case instituted otherwise than on a police report, the Magistrate must proceed under Sections 239 and 240. Section 239 provides that if the Magistrate, after considering the police report and documents and giving the accused an opportunity of being heard, finds the charge against the accused to be groundless, he shall discharge the accused and record his reasons. However, if the Magistrate is of thethinksre is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence triable under the Chapter, which the Magistrate is competent to try and can adequately sentence, he shall frame a charge in writing against the accused under Section 240.
Trial Before a Court of Session
Section 225 of the CrPC lays down that in every trial before a Court of Session, the prosecution shall be conducted by a Public Prosecutor. Section 226 provides that when the accused appears or is brought before the Court, the prosecutor must open his case by describing the charge against the accused and stating the evidence he proposes to present. If the Judge considers there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused after recording reasons, he shall discharge the accused under Section 227. Otherwise, if the Judge believes there is ground for presuming the accused has committed an offence, he shall frame a charge under Section 228. The charge must be read and explained to the accused, who is then asked to plead.
Plea of the Accused and Conviction on Plea of Guilty
Once the charge is framed, Section 241 applies in warrant cases and Section 251 in summons cases. The accused is asked to plead guilty or not guilty. If the guilty accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate may convict him under Section 241 in a warrant case and Section 252 in a summons case. In a trial before a Court of Session, if the accused pleads guilty, the Judge may record the plea and convict the accused under Section 229. These provisions empower the court to dispense with the trial if the accused voluntarily admits guilt.
Prosecution Evidence
If the accused does not plead guilty and claims to be tried, the court proceeds with the trial and takes evidence for the prosecution. Section 242 of the CrPC provides that in a warrant case instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall fix a date for the examination of witnesses and may issue summons ta a o compel their attendance. In summons cases, Section 254 allows the Magistrate to take evidence of prosecution witnesses and issue process to compel their attendance. In cases before a Court of Session, Section 230 authorizes the Judge to fix a date for examining witnesses and directing their attendance.
Statement of the Accused
After the prosecution evidence is recorded, Section 313 of the CrPC allows the court to examine the accused to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him. This is an essential procedural safeguard ensuring the accused gets an opportunity to personally respond to the incriminating material on record. The statement recorded under Section 313 is not under oath, and the accused cannot be punished for refusing to answer questions.
Defense Evidence
After recording the accused’s statement, the defense is allowed to present evidence. Section 243 of the CrPC governs defense evidence in warrant cases and Section 254(2) in summons cases. The accused can produce witnesses and documents. The court may issue a summons on a cause process to compel witness attendance. In trials before a Court of Session, the procedure is laid down in Section 233, allowing the accused to enter his defense and adduce evidence. If the accused applies for the issuance of any process for compelling the attendance of a witness or production of any document, the court must issue such process unless it considers the application vexatious, frivolous, or intended to delay proceedings.
Final Arguments
Once the defense evidence concludes, the case moves to the final stage: arguments. The prosecution presents its arguments first, followed by the defense. The court may allow the prosecution to respond to new legal points raised by the defense. This stage is crucial, as it summarizes the facts, evidence, and law applicable to the case. Both parties attempt to convince the court to decide in their favor based on the totality of the circumstances.
Judgment
After hearing arguments, the court delivers its judgment. Section 248 in warrant cases and Section 255 in summons cases govern the delivery of judgment by a Magistrate. Section 235 governs judgments in trials before a Court of Session. The court must either convict or acquit the accused, providing reasons in support of its decision. The judgment must be pronounced in open court, read out, or explained to the accused, and a copy given to him free of cost if he is convicted. The conviction may lead to sentencing, and the acquittal results in the discharge of the accused from the case.
Sentencing
If the accused is convicted, the court hears the accused on the question of sentence before passing it. This is a safeguard to ensure that the punishment is proportionate and that any mitigating circumstances are considered. Section 235(2) in Court of Session trials and Section 248(2) in Magistrate trials provide for this opportunity. The sentence may vary depending on the nature of the offence, prior record, and other relevant circumstances. Courts may impose imprisonment, fines, or both. In appropriate cases, provisions for probation or release on admonition may apply under the Probation of Offenders Act.
Appeals
A convicted person has the right to appeal, subject to the nature of the offence and sentence. The CrPC provides detailed procedures for filing appeals under Sections 374 to 394. Appeals may lie to the Sessions Court, High Court, or Supreme Court depending,,g on the nature and level of the case. An appellate court may uphold the conviction, reverse it, or order a retrial. It may also enhance or reduce the sentence.
Revision
Revisional jurisdiction allows higher courts to call for records of proceedings and examine the correctness, legality, or propriety of any order passed by a lower court. Section 397 of the CrPC gives High Courts and Sessions Judges this power. Revision is not a matter of right but a discretionary remedy, generally invoked in cases of gross miscarriage of justice, jurisdictional errors, or legal infirmities.
Reference
In cases involving substantial questions of law, subordinate courts may refer the matter to the High Court for its opinion. Sections 395 and 396 of the CrPC govern reference procedures. A subordinate court may refer the case if it involves the constitutional validity of any legal provision or interpretation requiring authoritative judgment.
Transfer of Criminal Cases
Section 406 of the CrPC empowers the Supreme Court to transfer any case or appeal from one High Court to another or from a criminal court subordinate to one High Court to another. Section 407 empowers High Courts to transfer cases from one court to another within their jurisdiction. Such transfers may be granted if there is an apprehension of bias, procedural irregularity, or to serve the ends of justice.
Legal Aid
Article 39A of the Indian Constitution provides for free legal aid to ensure that justice is not denied due to economic or other disabilities. Section 304 of the CrPC mandates that where the accused is unrepresented in a trial before a Court of Session and does not have sufficient means to engage a lawyer, the court must assign a defense counsel at the expense of the state. Legal Services Authorities established under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 facilitate, te the implementation of legal aid.
Juvenile Justice
Crimes committed by children under the age of 18 are governed by the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The procedures differ significantly from regular criminal trials. Juvenile Justice Boards conduct the inquiry, and the focus is on reform and rehabilitation rather than punishment. The Act prohibits sentencing juveniles to death or life imprisonment without the possibility of release.
Special Courts and Tribunals
Certain categories of offences are tried by Special Courts established under specific statutes. For example, the Prevention of Corruption Act, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act provide for special courts. These courts follow special procedures and often have stricter rules for bail and trial timelines. Similarly, tribunals may handle quasi-criminal matters like tax evasion or money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Compounding of Offences
Some criminal offences can be compounded, i.e., settled between the parties, resulting in the acquittal of the accused. Section 320 of the CrPC lists compoundable offences, categorized into two types—those that can be compounded without the permission of the court and those requiring court permission. Compounding is not allowed for serious offences like murder, rape, or dacoity. It aims to promote settlement in minor cases and reduce litigation.
Plea Bargaining
Plea bargaining is a process whereby the accused pleads guilty in exchange for a lesser sentence or a reduced charge. Chapter XXI-A of the CrPC, inserted by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005, deals with plea bargaining. It is applicable only for offences punishable with imprisonment up to seven years and not appliis is cable in cases involving socio-economic offences or crimes against women and children. It encourages quick disposal of cases and reduces the burden on courts.
Sentencing and Punishment
After a conviction, the court proceeds to determine the appropriate punishment. Sentencing in criminal cases serves several purposes, including retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation. Indian criminal law provides a range of punishments depending on the nature and gravity of the offense. These include capital punishment, life imprisonment, rigorous or simple imprisonment, forfeiture of property, and fines. The sentencing must be proportionate to the crime committed and take into account any mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Courts are also guided by statutory provisions that prescribe minimum or maximum penalties for certain offenses.
Types of Punishments under the Indian Penal Code
Section 53 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) outlines the types of punishments that can be imposed. These include death penthe the alty, life imprisonment, imprisonment (rigorous or simple), forfeiture of property, and fine. The death penalty is reserved for the rarest of rare cases and is subject to procedural safeguards. Life imprisonment implies imprisonment for the rest of the convict’s natural life unless commuted or remitted. Rigorous imprisonment involves hard labor, while simple imprisonment does not. Forfeiture of property involves confiscating certain assets of the convict. A fine may be imposed alone or in addition to other punishments. In certain cases, courts have discretion to release an offender on probation or admonition under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
Special Categories of Offenses and Trials
Certain offenses are treated differently due to their nature or impact on society. These include crimes against women and children, economic offenses, cybercrimes, and terrorism-related offenses. Special laws and fast-track courts have been established to handle such cases efficiently. For example, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act provides for child-friendly procedures and special courts. Economic offenses like money laundering and corruption are dealt with under laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Prevention of Corruption Act. Cybercrimes are addressed through the Information Technology Act, 2000. Anti-terror laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) provide for special investigative and procedural powers to tackle national security threats.
Appeals and Revisions
Once a judgment is passed, the aggrieved party can appeal to a higher court. Appeals can be on questions of law, facts, or both. The appellate court may confirm, reverse, or modify the decision of the lower court. In certain cases, a revision petition may be filed to rectify glaring errors of law or procedure. The hierarchy of appeals starts from the Court of Session, moves to the High Court, and finally to the Supreme Court. The Code of Criminal Procedure lays down detailed provisions for filing appeals and revisions, including the time limits and grounds for each.
Execution of Sentences
Execution refers to the actual implementation of the sentence passed by the court. In the case of imprisonment, the convict is lodged in jail. For fines, the court may issue a warrant for recovery. Capital punishment requires confirmation by the High Court before it can be executed. Mercy petitions can be filed with the President of India under Article 72 or with the Governor under Article 161 of the Constitution. The jail authorities are responsible for ensuring the sentence is carried out by human rights standards.
Probation, Parole, and Remission
Probation and parole are reformative measures aimed at rehabilitating offenders. Probation allows the offender to remain in the community under supervision instead of serving time in prison. Parole is the conditional release of a prisoner before the completion of the sentence. Remission refers to the reduction of the sentence granted by the government on grounds such as good conduct or special occasions. These measures are guided by the Probation of Offenders Act, state prison rules, and constitutional provisions. They play an essential role in decongesting prisons and encouraging positive behavioral change in convicts.
Juvenile Justice System
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, for a separate legal framework for dealing with offenses committed by minors. The act distinguishes between children in conflict with the law and children in need of care and protection. Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs) conduct proceedings in a child-friendly manner and focus on rehabilitation and reintegration rather than punishment. For heinous offenses committed by juveniles aged 16–18, the JJB may assess whether the child should be tried as an adult, following due procedure.
Conclusion
The criminal justice system in India is designed to ensure that crimes are investigated properly, justice is delivered fairly, and punishment is proportionate to the offense. It encompasses various stages from investigation and trial to sentencing and appeal each governed by well-defined procedures. The law also provides for special treatment in cases involving vulnerable groups, economic crimes, and national security. Despite several procedural safeguards, challenges such as delays, undertrial incarceration, and misuse of power remain. Continuous reforms, better infrastructure, and sensitization of law enforcement are essential to enhance the effectiveness and fairness of the system. The ultimate goal is to uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of all individuals in society.