Can Stricter punishment help avoid commission of crimes?

Stricter punishments do not always guarantee prevention of crime according to Deterrent Theory of Punishment.

The main object of this theory is to make the commission of an offence an ill-bargain for the offender and deter others from committing the same. Punishment prevents offences by destroying the conflict of interests by making acts which are injurious to others as injurious to the doer himself. This end is achieved by using severe punishment as a means on the offender.

According to Patton, “Deterrent theory emphasizes the necessity of protecting society by treating offenders in a manner so that others are deterred from breaking the law.”

This is the reason why in ancient times severe punishments were given to offenders like mutilation, beheading, flogging, branding etc.

However, in modern times this theory has been proved to be inefficient in preventing crimes. In the matter of, Rajendra Prasad V. State of UP, it has been said by the SC that number of hardened criminals after release from prison return to commit the crime for which they were punished.

Therefore, courts today are more inclined towards reformative theory in petty offences which includes admonition, probation etc., so that they can be prevented from becoming hardcore criminals.

“Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future”