India: Discretion In sentencing – A Critique

Last Updated: 20 May 2004
Article by Ruchika Sukh

Today, I am strongly of the opinion that criminal courts have achieved greater success in its fact-finding and law applying ability than its sentence inflicting function. Excellence in the former functions springs primarily from its unemotional, painstaking and objective approach, and its relative failure in choosing appropriate punishment, in the new context of the penology, arises from its emotional, expeditious and subjective reaction to the established offence and to the convicted criminal.

This approach to punishment did not matter in Blackstonian age. In the new developing ideas, the functioning of the court as a punishing authority, as distinct from its guilt finding authority, is a complicated art requiring the proper balancing of the several purposes of the criminal law such as retribution, deterrence, prevention, reformation and social rehabilitation of the offender. Traditional sentencing practices are not well suited to deal with crimes when they are regarded as behavioural problems and when a casual attitude replaces reliance on fear, blameworthiness and deterrence.

Judges can no longer afford to give to give only a few minutes to fixing the sentence; this demands now as much devotion and thought as guilt finding part of their function. "Thus for some offenders one purpose predominates, for other offenders other purposes will be in the forefront of the judge’s mind. In my view the essence of the aim of punishment is the concept of individualisation. Some criminals will hope to treat, some to deter, some to put in warehouse (for protective segregation); but to all we will seek to apply individually appropriate punishment. It is the blending of the means of expressing all these purposes into the punishment of the individual criminal that is the courts extremely difficult task". This can no longer be achieved by little attention being paid to this side by the court.

Illogical variations in punishments and non-attachment of importance to all relevant factors in determination of sentence have brought the courts under criticism. It is considered that the bench frequently lacks sufficient information and knowledge of the personality of the offender and the social group in which he lives, to be able to impose a rational sentence on him.

This involves two propositions - firstly; that the bench has at its disposal very little information regarding the offender, and secondly that it does not make the best use of such information as is available. One of the factors responsible is that we are all prisoners of our own personalities and one piece of evidence that the judge comes to attach greater importance in deciding what sentence to impose is his own reaction to the prisoner observed during the trial. Once an Additional Sessions Judge remarked that the whole bearing of the accused in the court indicates whether there is a chance for his reformation or not. Demeanour of the accused in the courtroom is given significant importance. It is however submitted that one piece of information which should, so far as possible, be excluded from the judge’s decision is the prisoners demeanour in the court. The more training and experience that one may acquire in psychology and sociology, the less one would rely on such deductions. But the judges rely upon these deductions with no formalised training in the assessment of personality. Thus illogical variations in punishments under these circumstances are more or less bound to be there.

If the discretion given to the judge in the matter of individualising punishment is to be effectively exercised, additional fact finding processes have to be resorted to by the judge. On theory, the problem of this pre-sentence examination of offenders was discussed in 1847 at Brussels, Congress of the International Penal and Penitentiary Commission. None dissented from the proposition that pre-sentence examination was an essential preliminary to a rational sentence for many types of criminals. The matter came up before the Indian Jail Committee also and it was stated: "Objection to this is that apart from duplication of the work which is involved, it would be too early to judge of the effect of conviction and of the yet unpronounced sentence on the accused." In some states of America an attempt has been made to get this over this difficulty by appointing in every court an officer. His duty is, after the prisoner’s guilt has been established to make inquiries and to furnish the judge with information including a report on his mental condition, which will enable to award punishment wisely and equitably.

The system is said to work satisfactorily in the USA although even there it was admitted attempts had been made, though unsuccessful, to influence the courts officers in favour of or against the prisoner. In this country I do not think that such a system would have any chance of success. The many religious and social cleavages that exist in India would inevitably lead to unevenness in the officer’s reports even if direct corruption could be guarded against, and I do not think that it would be wise to imitate the American system in this respect. At the same time, it does seem possible that more might be done seem possible that more might be done specially through the instrumentality of the public prosecutor, generally a vakil of long standing position to lay before the court after the question of the prisoners guilt has been determined such reliable information as would enable the court to adjust its sentence to needs of the case.

I feel that another criticism of this system is that the judge lacks sufficient information and knowledge of the penal system, which carries out its sentence, and of the effects of different types of punishments on different types of offenders. They have no liaison with prison authorities and there is no system of their regular visits to jails to see as to what facilities are available there and how the offenders are being treated and with what results. Accordingly no knowledge of the actual working of punishments and their effectiveness is available to courts. It is therefore necessary that some system of closer liaison between the judiciary and the penal authorities should be developed to meet with the criticism.

The next shortcoming, I believe is that the individual personality of the judge or the magistrate plays too large a part in the assessment of punishment; for example whether a given offender goes to jail for a protracted or retributive sentence or receives remedial treatment while living in the community often depends on the chance of which court happens to sentence him. There is, in other words, too great an illogical and fortuitous variation between sentences. It is undeniable that the courts have failed to develop any definite theory bearing on the task of sentencing. Reasons are rarely given for the sentences, which are imposed. If these were articulated it would have led to a rationalisation of sentencing since the sentencers would have to indicate the considerations, which in their view justified their decisions. This would have prevented them from being influenced by emotional reactions to the offender. This would also have lead to more consistency in sentencing policy.

In such a state of affairs of dissimilarities in the awards and illogicalities of punishments, bound, as these are to create distrust in the public and bickering and frustration in the mind of the offender, two types of suggestions have come to my mind for remedying the situation. First is that the judge should decide only guilty part of the offence and sentencing part should be attended to by a Sentencing Board comprising of Experts. This suggestion has not only been given by some of our modern day learned judges but is also said to be one which was known to our ancient law-givers and which has been quoted in Mrichhakatika, namely that the decision of the guilt or innocence is the function of the judge and the determination of sentence is for the king or the State.

Determination of sentence by ‘Board of Experts’ after making thorough checks of the offender and his back history is surely placing the offender in better hands from rehabilitative angle. However, being an administrative board, it cannot always be relied upon for objectivity of purpose and impartiality and unemotionality, which the public has come to expect from the judicial bodies. The danger of abuse of power by this executive body cannot be ruled out. Though the courts have developed means of protecting the individual who stands charged before them against the power of the State, they have not yet built up effective techniques of supervising administrative tyranny when that individual is a criminal. Shifting of this work from courts to sentencing Board is not yet readily acceptable proposition. Otherwise also, volume of work will require many boards and we have not so many experts for constituting them. The scheme does not therefore remain practicable at this stage on account of dearth of experts needed for it.

The other suggestion I put forward is one, which is also in line with views of some criminologists. Which is that there should be indeterminate sentence and cases should be reviewed from time to time and release ordered on the basis of progress achieved by the offender. At international level, the matter of indeterminate sentences came up before Cincinnati Conference 1870 and it was concluded that instead of pre-emptory sentences there should be indeterminate sentence. It was also recommended in Second international Congress of Comparative Law held at Hague in 1937 by a resolution "That the time of detention should be capable of being shortened or prolonged as a result of the consideration of a report on the progress of the recidivist made by some competent authority".

The indeterminate sentence is an effort to make punishment truly reformative. Its theory is that one who has been guilty of serious infraction of the criminal law should be imprisoned for such time as is necessary to cure him of his anti-social tendencies and should then be conditionally released on parole, with adequate supervision for such time as is necessary to restore him to the normal life of law abiding citizens of the community. Since it is impossible to forecast what term of imprisonment and supervision may be necessary to accomplish this result, sentence is not to be for a definite term but for such time as may necessary to rehabilitate the offender and to restore him to his place in the society.

In order, however, not to lose the beneficent effect which indeterminate sentence offers, and at the same time availing of the sprit of impartiality which the courts have and to which the public opinion attaches much value, I am of the view that when it is felt by the court that an accused deserves imprisonment, it should call for pre-sentence report through probation authorities and on basis thereof fix the maximum period of sentence considered necessary. By requiring pre-sentence report before the courts order maximum term of imprisonment, old system of arbitrary orders without having adequate knowledge of the personality and circumstances of the offender vanishes. The information furnished will be sufficient to justify decision as to whether there should be sentence of imprisonment; it may not be sufficient to take decision about exact date of release and that does not matter as the court is being expected only to fix the maximum period of detention and not the exact date of discharge. In so far as the court fixes maximum period, the object of deterrence would also be sufficiently served by this original sentence. The protection of the society will be secured by the indeterminate nature of sentence, termination being adjusted to reformative needs and response in the individual case. As the court shall do sentencing, the public’s demand about the sentencer’s impartiality too will be met.

Further, in this case, determination of exact period of detention has been left to a tribunal having a judge as its member, and since this is to be done on a reference made to a tribunal having a judge as its member, fear of tyranny of the executive body is properly safeguarded against. As this reference is to be after a certain specified period, this time should be sufficient for training or treatment and will enable collection of adequate information about all factors of personality of the offender as also about his response to the prison programme chalked out for him. This will enable the Tribunal to take a rational and calculated decision about correct period of imprisonment.

The court itself will determine sentence of fine and probation under the scheme. Since in cases not calling for imprisonment for specified time or more imprisonment is not to be imposed, a large number of cases will be disposed of by the court and the Tribunal will not be required to deal with rush of cases. Therefore, many Tribunals wouldn’t be required in a state. Problem of available experts also wouldn’t come in the way of work. The load of work not being very heavy, dealing will not become just a routine; proper individualisation will become a reality and quantum of punishment required for an individual prisoner will no more find illogicalities. This will pacify much of the criticism, which is today being put at the door of the court.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.