Nowadays, committing crime is becoming increasingly usual. With certainty, criminals are considered to be assigned with fixed penalty, while majority favors for the verdict to be taken on a particular incident. Since, each suspicious activity has distinct characteristics. In my opinion, each illicit step deserves same wrath.
To begin with, penalizing the identical for all the crimes reduces the ambition. Firstly, a culprit knows the severity of punishment under the law for each kind of unlawful activity, therefore, if the judgment is similar to that of worst one, it will vent a desire. Such as, considering a mobile snatcher, if it is in his knowledge about the castigation for this act, he would refrain from attempting it. Consequently, thieves tend to vary decisions and planning on the severity of chastisement.
On the other hand, taking specific verdict for each crime under a law drives the intention. This is because a suspicious person knows the judgment of an illegal activity. Similarly, if the minute unlawful act may be lead to short retribution, a criminal will might not be much worried about. For instance, if the verdict for car bike stealing contains 3. 5 months, it might not prevent a culprit to commit same illicit because he will be able to proceed towards similar deed repeatedly after every 120 to 150 days. Hence, penalty for particular illegal action leads towards an increase in crime rate.
In conclusion, identical and the worst requital for all crimes drives to reduce the rate, while that of distinguishing for specific function may not be proved effective to lead peaceful. I am convinced that the illegitimate problem can only be resolved through similar judgment. 
Nowadays, committing  
crime
 is becoming  
increasingly
 usual. With certainty, criminals  
are considered
 to  
be assigned
 with  
fixed
 penalty, while majority favors for the verdict to  
be taken
 on a particular incident.  
Since
, each suspicious activity has distinct characteristics. In my opinion, each illicit step deserves same wrath.
To  
begin
 with, penalizing the identical for all the  
crimes
  reduces
 the ambition.  
Firstly
, a culprit knows the severity of punishment under the law for each kind of unlawful activity,  
therefore
, if the judgment is similar to that of  
worst
 one, it will vent a desire. Such as, considering a mobile snatcher, if it is in his knowledge about the castigation for this act, he would refrain from attempting it.  
Consequently
, thieves tend to vary decisions and planning on the severity of chastisement. 
On the other hand
, taking specific verdict for each  
crime
 under a law drives the intention. This is  
because
 a suspicious person knows the judgment of an illegal activity.  
Similarly
, if the minute unlawful act may be lead to short retribution, a criminal will might not be much worried about.  
For instance
, if the verdict for car bike stealing contains 3. 5 months, it might not  
prevent
 a culprit to commit same illicit  
because
 he will be able to proceed towards similar deed  
repeatedly
 after every 120 to 150 days.  
Hence
, penalty for particular illegal action leads towards an increase in  
crime
 rate. 
In conclusion
, identical and the worst requital for all  
crimes
 drives to  
reduce
 the rate, while that of distinguishing for specific function may not  
be proved
 effective to lead peaceful. I  
am convinced
 that the illegitimate problem can  
only
  be resolved
 through similar judgment.