The Supreme Court declared that criminals are not inherently born but are shaped by various influences and circumstances. This ruling highlights the significance of societal, environmental, and psychological factors in the development of criminal behaviour.
New Delhi: Criminals are shaped by circumstances rather than born inherently criminal, the Supreme Court recently observed, highlighting the various influences that lead individuals to commit crimes.
A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan, On July 3, made these comments while considering a bail application for an accused whose trial has been stalled for the past four years.
Read Also: Inhuman Conditions in Indian Prisons| SC Urges States & UTs to Address the Issue
The apex court stated,
“Criminals are not born out but made,”
The court further emphasized the inherent good in every individual, cautioning against deeming any criminal as irredeemable.
The court noted,
“This humanist fundamental is often missed when dealing with delinquents, juvenile and adult,”
The court remarked in its July 3 order,
“Indeed, every saint has a past and every sinner a future,”
The court emphasized that,
“A variety of factors contribute to a person’s decision to commit a crime, noting that these influences might be social or economic, stem from value erosion or parental neglect, arise from stressful circumstances, or be the result of temptations in a context of affluence contrasted with poverty or other deprivations.”
These observations included in the top court’s order granting bail to an accused involved in a counterfeit currency case.
The man challenged the Bombay High Court‘s order from February 5, 2024, which declined to release him on bail. The Supreme Court noted that the appellant has been in custody for the past four years since his arrest on February 9, 2020.
The top court expressed concern about how long the trial will ultimately take, stating that,
“Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime.”
The Supreme Court emphasized that even for serious crimes, an accused has a constitutional right to a speedy trial.
The court said,
“Over time, courts have forgotten the principle that Bail is not to be withheld as a punishment.”
The Supreme Court seems to be stressing the importance of the right to a timely trial and appropriate bail considerations, regardless of the severity of the alleged crime.
The top court stated,
“If the state or any prosecuting agency, including the concerned court, lacks the capability to ensure or protect the fundamental right of an accused to a speedy trial as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, then the state or any prosecuting agency should not oppose the bail plea on the grounds of the crime’s severity.”
The court further emphasized,
“The right of the accused to a speedy trial can be considered violated, thus infringing upon Article 21 of the Constitution.”
Consequently, the court granted bail to the man, stipulating that he must remain within Mumbai city limits and report to the relevant NIA office or police station every fifteen days.
The individual apprehended in February 2020 in Andheri, Mumbai, carrying a bag containing 1,193 counterfeit Indian currency notes, each with a denomination of Rs 2,000. The investigation agency claimed that the counterfeit notes smuggled from Pakistan into Mumbai.
The court also noted that two other co-accused in the case had already been released on bail.