Jain Journal 1980 10

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 29

OCTOBER 1980
Case, 29 it has been observed: "Unfortunately the Indian Penal Code still lingers in somewhat compartmentalized system of punishment viz. imprisonment, simple or rigorous, fine and of course the capital sentence." In fact, the whole judgment is classic from the standpoint of analyzing the inadequacies of the existing penal system and prophesizingly suggesting radical changes therein on the strength of balance between eastern experience and western inquisitiveness. In the same judgment, their Lordships observe: "...Perhaphs the time has come for Indian Criminologists to rely more on Pātañjala Sutra as a scientific curative for crimogenic factors than on the blind jail term set out in the penal code and that may be why westerm researchers are now seeking Indian Yogic ways in normalizing the individual and the group.' In another Supreme Court case, 31 note has been taken of the concepts of afterlife and re-birth in connection with penology and criminology.
"30
67
The trend of judicial mind in India, beyond definition in precise terms, may however, be revealed in connection with the new considerations hovering round the science of penology in the words of Supreme Court Judges themselves :
(1) "...the winds of criminological change blow over Indian Statutory thought."32
(2) "It is not possible for court...to explore the murky depths of a warped and twisted mind so as to discover whether an offender is capable of reformation or redemption, and if so, in what way. That is a subject on which only experts...could hazard an opinion with any degree of confidence. Judicial psychotherapy has its obvious and inherent limitations."33
(3) "...there are no penological guidelines in the statute for preferring the lesser sentence..."
934
29 Mohd. Giasuddin Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, per their Lordships V. R. Krishna Iyer and Jasawant Singh JJ., 1977 Criminal Law Reporter, Supreme Court, 285. p. 290, Para 18.
30 Ibid, p. 286.
31 Shiv Mohan Singh Vs the State (Delhi Admn) per their Lordships V. Y. Chandrachud (Nw CJ) and V. R. Krishna Iyer, JJ, 1977 Criminal Law Reporter, Supreme Court, 204.
32 1974 Criminal Law Reporter, SC, 278 Raghuvir Singh Vs State of Haryana per Krishna Iyer J, p. 279.
33 Ibid, p. 270; Edigamma Anagamma Vs State of A.P., p.276.
34 Ibid, p. 500, Francis Alias Parman Vs State of Kerala and also Bhagawanta Vs State of Maharashtra, per M.H. Beg J., p. 504.