The government entities involved in law enforcement, criminal case adjudication, and changing criminal behavior make up the criminal justice system, which is a tool for social control. Reforms to the criminal justice system typically involve changes to the courts, prisons, and police. The Central Government has just begun the process of rewriting legislation such as the “Indian Penal Code,” “Criminal Procedure Code,” and “Indian Evidence Act” in collaboration with all the stakeholders, with the aim of making significant changes to criminal laws.
India is an emerging global superpower, a strong economy that ranks sixth in the world, a stable and democratic government, and significant technological, military, and nuclear advancements. It also has a rich and diverse cultural heritage that dates back to some of the earliest historical civilizations. India is a nation that is also plagued by a number of unsolvable and stubborn social, economic, and political issues i.e., ranging from poverty and unemployment to corruption, pollution, and separatism, all of which fester and continue to impede its development. John Kenneth Galbraith, a renowned economist and a former U.S. ambassador to India, described it as a “functioning anarchy” as a result of these discrepancies. When thinking about any aspect of India, including its crime problem and criminal justice system, a constant dualism of optimism and despair is produced. This is evident in many of the papers to this special issue of the Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice on Crime and Justice in India. In debates of criminal law, policy, and punishment in the United States, the term “the criminal justice system” is so common that, at least in casual usage, almost anyone thinks to challenge it. However, it wasn’t until the 1960s that this method of speaking about and considering the police, courts, jails, and prisons as a whole “system” started to spread. Using new research in intellectual history and the history of science, this essay places the concept of “the criminal justice system” within the broader historical context of systems theories.
According to Khan and Unnithan (2008), academic criminology and criminal justice in India has not grown as quickly or to the same extent as it has in the West. It is uncommon to find research on crime and criminal justice that goes beyond a description of the problems and careful observation. As a result, there are currently few contributions from the field to criminal justice policy-making and evaluation. 16 academics from different backgrounds, including 10 from the United States, 5 from India, and 1 from the United Kingdom, are represented in this special edition and have written works that are crucial advancements in the field.
The criminal justice system’s goal;
- Avoiding criminal activity.
- Punishing offenders and convicted criminals.
- Rehabilitation of offenders and prisoners.
- As much as you can, provide the victims recompense.
- Keeping society’s law and order.
- To stop offenders from carrying out any further crimes.
System of Criminal Law in India;
- The compilation of criminal laws in India is credited primarily to Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay.
- The Indian Penal Code of 1860, the Civil Rights Act of 1955, the Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of 1989 are the main sources of the criminal legislation that is currently in effect in India.
- The official criminal code of India is known as the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was created in 1860 based on the recommendations of the First Law Commission of India, which was presided over by Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay and founded in 1834 as a result of the Charter Act of 1833.
- The primary statute for the application of criminal law in is the Criminal Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973.
- The Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution includes criminal law and criminal process.
The criminal justice system is comprised of all of the governmental entities in charge of upholding the law, preserving peace and harmony, and dealing with criminal activity. The goal of the criminal justice system is to guarantee that everyone who experiences harm or loss at the hands of another is given the opportunity to argue his case and seek redress.
In the world, there are primarily two types of criminal justice systems. Which are:
- oppositional system
- Investigative process
Oppositional system
Common law nations that were formerly a certain country’s colonies use this system. In this method, both the prosecution and the defense present arguments to the court, and the case is determined using procedural and evidence law standards. The judge makes a decision based on the arguments made by the two attorneys and the facts presented in court. According to this legal system, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
India adheres to this system since it was formerly a colony of the British Empire and is hence known as a common law nation. Since it is assumed that a crime has been committed against the state as a whole, the prosecutor speaks for the state because it is the state’s responsibility to uphold the law. Justice is delayed in this system because both parties have the right to a fair trial and hearing.
Investigative process
The civil law nations use this system. In this system, the judge has the authority to conduct his or her own investigation and render a decision based on the results. There are attorneys for both sides present, but unlike in an adversarial system, there is no witness cross-examination. The judge’s wisdom and judgment abilities determine the outcome and the accuracy of the judgement.
This approach makes the trial process considerably quicker and less expensive. It is less formal, and the competency of each individual judge, not the advocate, determines if justice has been served.
The act of committing a crime soon after receiving a conviction for another infraction is known as reoffending. According to estimates, those who have dealt with the criminal justice system before commit about half of all crimes. Even though the government has spent a lot of money managing offenders over the past ten years, reoffending rates have remained high. The percentage of people who commit crimes again within a year after being released from jail has not changed considerably. Reoffending must be curbed in order to decrease the number of victims and the taxpayer’s expenses, which are thought to total up to £13 billion annually. By implementing various tactics, such as the “paying by outcomes” method, which entails providing cash to programs that have been shown to be successful, the government has asserted that it will cut rates of reoffending. Along with being able to offer effective community-based sanctions like electronic tagging and support offenders so they can safely reintegrate back into their communities.
There are several reasons why an offender can commit another crime, including problems with housing or job, drug or alcohol misuse, a lack of interpersonal connections that provide a support network, or even mental health problems. Many convicts have a history of social exclusion and have received inadequate education, making it challenging for them to find steady employment. Numerous circumstances might cause people to commit crimes again, and until these issues are resolved, such people will continue to act criminally. It goes without saying that lowering reoffending rates is best for society, but sadly, criminal justice systems face obstacles in their efforts to do so.
Crime is a transgression of social norms as perceived and articulated by a criminal code developed by those in positions of social and political authority. People who break these rules face punishment from the state, societal disgrace, and status loss.
The different actors and agencies are clearly divided. In each case, every piece of evidence is considered, especially if it is favorable to the side that is seeking to prevail. The appearance of fairness in operation across the criminal justice system serves to promote the legitimacy of the institution.
Hobbes claimed that because of this inherent selfishness, people will do anything to pursue pleasure. According to Bentham, a person is driven to seek pleasure and to avoid suffering. He typically acts on instinct, and there weren’t any rules or boundaries to restrain his behavior in earlier times. His goals clashed with those of others due to the growing population and communities, which created a hostile environment. Consequently, a system that could track a man’s actions was required to control his behavior. The criminal justice system has evolved in much the same way that man has.
The opposing parties frequently work together to get the desired outcome, sacrificing procedural justice in favor of effectiveness. Given that both sides must present as much evidence as they can in the hopes of winning the case, the length of a trial becomes an issue. If the judge believes that using the relevant evidence would be against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the judge may exclude it.
In the Indian criminal justice system, a judge’s duties include:
I conducting the trial fairly and in public;
(ii) hearing all the witnesses and reviewing the evidence.
iii) To determine the accused’s guilt or innocence.
If the accused is found guilty, the judge then imposes the punishment. He might send that individual depending on what the law requires, you may be sentenced to jail, pay a fine, or both.
Offenses were codified and the trial process was established as time and technology advanced. Justice was more effectively and consistently administered as a result. The British East India Company created the current criminal justice system in India prior to independence. However, it has undergone numerous alterations and changes since gaining independence. Various committees were occasionally established to advocate systemic reforms and put forth ideas for ways to lower the crime rate in the nation.
The committee recommended paying the victim’s compensation.
The country’s police system should be improved so that it is transparent and responsible. It emphasized the selection of public prosecutors through formal examinations. It was suggested that judges with expertise in criminal law be present on every higher court. It was suggested that the offenses be reclassified as socioeconomic offenses, crimes under the penal code, etc. To regularly review the criminal justice system, a presidential commission must be constituted. It proposed converting the adversarial criminal justice system into an inquisitorial one in order to hasten trials and address the problem of open cases.
It is believed that the prosecution is burdened unfairly and disproportionately by the presumption of innocence of the accused, delaying the administration of justice.
The criminal justice system is a framework that regulates the operation of the courts, prisons, police, and other organizations that serve to provide victims with justice. It is the responsibility of the state to uphold peace and harmony in society, and this can only be done by effectively enforcing laws and having a functioning criminal justice system. The British East India Company played a significant role in the development of India’s criminal laws, but only after numerous changes.
The government recognizes the need to overhaul the justice system to deal with new crimes like organized crime, white collar crime, cyber crime, etc. that are emerging as a result of time and technological improvement. As a result, the government established numerous committees that provided various suggestions and recommendations. But the situation hasn’t changed at all. Due to the backlog of cases that come from the lack of judges, courts are still under strain. The general population believes that corruption has rendered the police force incapable of carrying out their duty and that they are controlled by politicians. Custodial rapes and fatalities are happening more frequently every day. The public becomes afraid as a result of this. Prisons are overcrowded, and inmates are subjected to cruel and inhumane treatment. Despite being on paper, the committees’ recommendations have not been fully carried out. In order to deliver fair justice, it is necessary to address all the problems and fill all the holes in the Indian criminal justice system.