Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. Helping the victims to get adequate compensation from the offender wherever possible or ensuring their rehabilitation in any other way as the circumstance may warrant.

6. Efficient and fair application of law ensuring proper treatment of suspects, defendants, those who are held in custody and witnesses. Also ensuring that the innocents are acquitted without harassment and the guilty are duly punished.

7. Ensuring that criminal justice system is accountable to the society. Dr. P.K.Sen rightly opines that Indian epics which depict the glory of past Indian civilization and culture amply justify that our juris- consults were thoroughly acquainted with the science of criminology. Their main emphasis was on the mental aspect of the individuals personality because they regarded human mind as the centre from where all thoughts whether good or bad, emanate. The ethical approach led them to believe that the offenders indulge in criminal behaviour because of their mental depravity and physiognomy had nothing to do with it. It is for this reason that they treated delinquent in a medico-legal perspective and considered them as patient suffering from some mental disorder. Their stress was on the need for criminologists to understand the spiritual aspect of human existence and recognize the role of meditation and yoga in mitigating criminality. It is the egoistic urge of human being which prompts him to commit anti-social acts with a view to deriving pleasure. The attitude towards crime and criminal at a given time in a society represents the basic value of that society. By and large, three types of reactions are discernible in various societies. The first is a traditional reaction which regards criminal as basically depraved and dangerous person for whom infliction of punishment is the only alternative to eliminate him from normal society. This punitive approach, however, represents the earlier stages of development of penology and no longer finds support in modern times. The second reaction treats criminal as a victim of his circumstances and a product of multiple factor operating within the society. Thus, criminal is treated as a sick person requiring therapeutic treatment. The third and more recent reaction to criminal is to be found in preventive approach which lays greater emphasis on eliminating conditions which are responsible for criminality in the offender. Keeping in view the aforementioned factor, penology may also be approached from various points of view each giving rise to particular kind of penology, such as Administrative Penology, Scientific Penology, Academic Penology and Analytical Penology, i.e. (1) Administrative Penology can also be called applied penology because it represents different penological systems in force in different countries. Its predominant feature is implementation of governmental penal policies and institutional treatment of offenders. Its prime functions are custody, security and control. It addresses itself to the solution of penological problems.

(2) Scientific penology attempts to solve the problems arising in treatment of offenders under the aegis of specialists, particularly from the medico-phychological point of view. Its principal concern is to prove into the personality of offenders and not the offences. Criminal penology, undoubtedly is a part of scientific penology. It is based on the conception that there is always a determinable relationship between cause and effect.

(3) Academic penology is mainly descriptive in character, its main purpose being dissemination of penological knowledge through intensive teaching and research. It concerns itself with theoretical knowledge of penology.

(4) Analytical penology aims at ascertaining as objectively as possible, the adequate of existing penal policies and methods and suggest measures for improving the system. Thus, it makes a critical analysis of penal measures and offers solutions for efficient administration of penal justice. The purpose of analyzing aforementioned view point herein is to indicate that even when in case of criminals who are found guilty and convicted reformative approach is adopted to bring them in main stream of the society, whether those in whose case the trial Court, posted with over all facts and circumstances record order of acquittal can be deprived of opportunity to join police service on the basis of the fact that they were implicated and tried in a criminal case. With new criminological development, particularly in the field of penology, it has been generally accepted that punishment must be in proportion to the gravity of the offence. It has been further suggested that reformation of criminal rather than his expulsion from society is more purposeful for his rehabilitation. With this aim in view, the modern penologists have focused their attention on individualization of offender through treatment method. Today, old barbarous methods of punishment such as mutilation, branding, hanging, burning, stoning, flogging, amputation, starving the criminal to death or subjecting him to pillory or poetic punishment etc. are completely abandoned. With the exception that it should not stretch too far, modern penologist reaffirm their faith in reformative justice. It is a known fact that punishment always carries with it a stigma inasmuch as it fetters the normal liberty of individual. Investigate research reveal that it is the mental depravity of the offenders which make them delinquent and therefore, a system of clinical treatment seems inevitable for the correction of the offender. In the circumstances once reformative approach is being shown towards who were convicted and are under undergoing penalty, compartmentalization of those who are tried and so acquitted in a separate category cannot be a healthy sign. Once a competent court of jurisdiction, acquit somebody, presumption is that he cannot be blamed. Thus, once a person is found not guilty and acquitted of the charges, he is to be treated in the main stream of society like any other person. Once a person is acquitted of the allegation made against him, the reason and the background in which order of acquittal is recorded is immaterial. In the circumstances, we are of the view that on acquittal of a person, he should not be considered as unsuitable for appointment in Delhi Police merely because he was tried for an offence from which he is finally acquitted at the outset. However, his suitability may be adjudged in view of the law laid down by Honble Supreme Court in the case of Daya Shankar Yadav Vs. UOI and Ors.