The emerging thought of people believes common punishment for all irrespective to the graveness of crime or intention of criminal. However, others have altogether different opinions for recorking the punishment for law abiders. I am of the view that cruelty and other factors should be considered while deciding the penalty.
Firstly, it has been evident from the past that our ancestors used to sit under a tree and pronounce the judgement based on the facts and situation of the crime. As a result, most of the problems were solved by the “Panchayat(s)” duly elected by the villagers. With wisdom, and hindsight, the chairman punishes the aggrieved party for his wrongful act. For instance, Murder in the pretext of self-defense and killing someone for a bribe are altogether different situations as the mindset and objective of wrongful act is not the same thing. As a result, the jury needs to consider whether the mind of criminal is guilty or not?
On the other hand, with the increase of crime rates in a myriad of nations, the Govt. of India has divided the offences into three categories, compoundable offence, non-compoundable offence, offence with imprisonment. Because of the segregation of crimes and their punishment, common fines and dire consequences are pre-defined which would help to decline the graph of crime rates in the society. To quote an example, Traffic violators are always facing monetary fines rather than confiscations of vehicles.
To recapitulate, the Apex Court has always lambasted and admonished and create fear in the mind of people in order to curb the illegitimate work but the lawmaker always protect the innocent irrespective of caste, gender, and nationality. Speaking of which, it always bears the gravity of crime before issuance of any decree, ordinance, order, and an award.
The emerging
thought
of
people
believes common punishment for all irrespective to the graveness of
crime
or intention of criminal.
However
, others have altogether
different
opinions for
recorking
the punishment for law
abiders
. I am of the view that cruelty and other factors should
be considered
while deciding the penalty.
Firstly
, it has been evident from the past that our ancestors
used
to sit under a tree and pronounce the judgement based on the facts and situation of the
crime
.
As a result
, most of the problems
were solved
by the “
Panchayat
(s)”
duly
elected by the villagers. With wisdom, and hindsight, the chairman punishes the aggrieved party for his wrongful act.
For instance
, Murder in the pretext of self-defense and killing someone for a bribe are altogether
different
situations as the mindset and objective of wrongful act is not the same thing.
As a result
, the jury needs to consider whether the mind of criminal is guilty or not?
On the other hand
, with the increase of
crime
rates in a myriad of nations, the Govt. of India has divided the
offences
into three categories, compoundable
offence
, non-compoundable
offence
,
offence
with imprisonment.
Because
of the segregation of
crimes
and their punishment, common fines and dire consequences are
pre-defined
which would
help
to decline the graph of
crime
rates in the society. To quote an example, Traffic violators are always facing monetary fines
rather
than confiscations of vehicles.
To recapitulate, the Apex Court has always lambasted and admonished and create fear in the mind of
people
in order to curb the illegitimate work
but
the lawmaker always protect the innocent irrespective of caste, gender, and nationality. Speaking of which, it always bears the gravity of
crime
before
issuance of any decree, ordinance, order, and an award.
Funny
Love
Wow
Angry
Sad