Nature and Framework of Crime

Image Credit: www.toppr.com

Hello friends here is one another article related to criminal law. The concept of crime was already described in this blog in which definition were also discussed. In this blog the detailed nature of crime is discussed. This blog is only for study purpose and for legal advice you must contact us trough the contact form at the bottom of this blog page.

=======

Crime is a changing concept dependent upon the social development of people that is upon the fundamental interest and values dominating their common beliefs. But as the time passed by and humans started to regularise themselves the Nature and Definition of crime became clearer.

Four main frameworks of a crime:

a) Crime as a social construction: - this poses a difficulty for creating a general definition of crime as it varies across cultures. For terms of Sec. 377 of IPC were decriminalised due to the changing in the minds of the public in general and all the people it was effecting. Also like the prohibition of alcohol drinking or smoking at certain places, the coalition of the public is necessary.

b) Crime as defined by religious doctrine or authority: - It creates conflicts between religions as well as between society and religion. Even in modern day society, a crime can be defined as an action that goes against the law of God at some places.

e.g. i) Sharia Law in Middle East,

e.g. ii) In Saudi Arabia, a woman driving is a crime and even though this law is absurd, that is the law.

e.g. iii) Honor killings and domestic abuse are examples of behaviour, which may be sanctioned within a particular religion but would disagree with basic state law, most commonly in westernized societies.

c) Crime defined by the law of a particular nation or state: - an act can only be defined as criminal in accordance to the laws of the state in which it was committed. This creates a difficulty in defining crime as what may be considered a criminal action in one state or country may not be viewed the same way in another.

There is a division created by the morals that tends the government to make rules which outlaws certain acts which wouldn’t have been a crime otherwise. 

e.g. i) Adultery is an offence in India under Section 497 of IPC but, it is no offence in America, it is civil wrong in England.

e.g. ii) Selling liquor in Maharashtra is legal whereas is a crime in Gujarat.

e.g. iii) Kerela has no restrictions on cow slaughter but cow slaughter in Andhra Pradesh and Telengana is a crime.

e.g. iv) The non-violent drug offences are considered as crimes because it is declared by the government. Indeed it wouldn’t be a crime the government didn’t categorise drugs something as illegal.

d) Crime is of individualistic responsibility and varies from time to time, so places blame on individuals rather than the systems they are contained within. However, by viewing crime in relation to social and political theory it is possible to look at the causes of a person’s behaviour, which may render them irresponsible for their actions, and also to define actions as crimes, which may not be considered so within the society itself. The nature of the crime changes from time to time as per the requirements of the present generation society.

e.g. i) during the reign of Hitler in Nazi Germany, the systematic slaughter of the Jewish race was not considered criminal; however, when viewed in retrospect, the Holocaust is considered to be the ‘greatest crime in history’. But during the trial only a small number of officers were named as personally responsible, because it was decided that many of those involved could not be charged as they were simply following the instructions issued to them by their superiors and so did not willingly commit the crimes.

e.g. ii) Similarly, the practice of ‘Sati’ prevailing in the primitive society is now strictly prohibited and is punishable.

Thus it can be concluded that no action in itself is criminal; it is the consequences that follow which define it as being so. An act cannot be classed, as a crime until the offender is caught and punished, in the absence of a public authority to do so, there is no crime.

The nature of crime is changing due to the changes in the society and the environment. The very definition of crime depends upon the values of a given society.

The changing nature of crime:

The changes have been noticed that people who did not committed crime, due to the availability of knowledge and technology are tempted to commit crime seeing how easily it can be done and various ways of avoiding to get caught.

Drug dealing which used to be done face to face in the middle of street with the fear of getting busted now can be done online with just some clicks of a keyboard.

Distance is just a number now with various means of transport are available a wrongdoer can easily commit a crime in one city and move to another city in hours.

The lack of interaction among people, not knowing who actually lives next door makes it easy for perpetrators to find their targets and commence their activities.

With such changing happening in the nation the police authorities are also required to change their methods of tracking the criminals and increase their technical ability. With the criminals being smart the authorities are required to be smarter.

Criminals are adapting to the measures taken by the police authorities.

Local gang members have noticed that they can make more money, with less risk of getting caught and smaller penalties if they do get caught, by using technology.