Crime does not only involve the offender; it implicates the victim as well. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. – Martin Luther King Jr.
INTRODUCTION
Crime has existed since immemorial and is omnipresent, irrespective of criminal justice systems and harsh penalties. Discussions about crime, in general, are often very criminological, i.e., the idea is focused on the motivation, cause, and patterns of criminal behaviour. However, the victim is the one who is very much excluded from the discussion about crime. As Justice Benjamin Cardozo aptly said, “Justice is due to the accuser as well as the accused.”[1] The balance of justice demands that victims, for whose protection the whole system was conceived, should be treated justly. But this ideal often remains unfulfilled.
Victimology and criminology jointly exhibit a more comprehensive approach to understanding crime. While criminology looks deep into criminal behaviour through its sociological, psychological, and economic lenses, victimology focuses on the experiences, rights, and rehabilitation of victims. By merging these fields, we may create strategies to prevent crime effectively in society, provide support for the victims through appropriate agencies, and address specific issues such as domestic violence, sexual assault, and child victimization.
CRIMINOLOGY: THE STUDY OF CRIME AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR
Criminology focuses on the study of crime and criminal behaviour, making use of the insights that fields like sociology, psychology, economics, statistics, and anthropology may have. Criminologists aim to understand:[2]
- Characteristics of those who commit crimes
- Motives behind criminal activity
- Impact of crime on people and communities
- Strategies for avoiding criminal activity
MOTIVATIONS FOR CRIMINALITY
Criminologists examine a variety of viewpoints regarding the origins and consequences of crime in their research. But one can never be sure of what drives them to commit the crime. Is it because of social factors, psychological factors, or something else? One can never be sure. A major portion of psychological criminology consists of the cognitions in the form of beliefs and values accompanied by thoughts attached to a person about the social surroundings and humane interactions. These cognitions are largely influenced by sociological criminology as all those social strains that an individual perceives, force him to make a choice that is not socially accepted and is considered abhorrent.[3] Potential causes of or motivations for criminal activity include:
- Parental relations
- Poverty
- Lack of empathy
- Education
- Peer influence
- Drugs and alcohol
- Easy opportunity
IMPACT ON SOCIETY[4]
Criminality impacts society in multifaceted dimensions, affecting offenders and those close to them. Egleton’s study about homelessness among African Americans post-incarceration reveals how loss of employment post-imprisonment often leads to homelessness, preventing the reintegration of offenders back into society and increasing the prospects of reoffending, with the recursive process reinforcing crime. For instance, Geiger’s study on the first responders in terrorist attacks in Israel shows that these individuals are not stoic heroes but highly emotional. Their ability to cope in various ways, for example, through an internalised sense of serving a higher power, is a function of the kind of psychological resources shaped by cultural and social perspectives. These studies illustrate the ripple effect that criminality and its aftermath place on many dimensions of society in complicating attempts to break a cycle of crime and trauma.
VICTIMOLOGY: UNDERSTANDING THE VICTIMS OF CRIME
Victimology is a specialised branch of criminology that tries to understand the often-overlooked lives of those who bear the weight of the crime. In the words of the criminologist Benjamin Mendelsohn, “The main concern was the victim’s precipitation; to what degree the victim is responsible for their victimization and their cooperation with the criminal justice system.”[5] At its core, victimology investigates how victims have been or might be harmed or abused and how the victims can be empowered, assisted, and rehabilitated.[6]
Victimology examines the characteristics of the victims and the factors that make certain individuals more susceptible to victimization.[7] Initially, ‘victim blameworthiness’ was the main focus. But now Victimology goes beyond analysis, focusing on advocacy and empowerment by promoting victims’ rights within the justice system and society. It highlights the importance of treating victims with dignity, offering compassionate support, and involving them in the pursuit of justice.[8] It detects vulnerabilities and discrepancies in the victimization rate while concentrating on developing equitable and effective responses to crime within a wide range of contexts, including restorative justice principles and researching community-based alternatives.
SOURCES OF VICTIMIZATION
Victimization comes through various personal, social, and environmental factors that heighten the possibility of one becoming a target. Personal features, including age, gender, and socioeconomic status, have a chance of making the individual vulnerable; thus, there are women, children, older adults, and people from a low-income status who become targets for abuse or exploitation. Higher crime rates are related to poverty and unemployment as well as environmental factors of disorganized communities. Furthermore, resource inadequacy in healthcare, policing, and education increases victimization. Lifestyle choices and daily routines, such as frequenting dangerous areas or working irregular hours, increase contact with potential offenders. Institutional failure is a relevant factor – ineffective law enforcement response, for example, or discriminatory practices.
LEGAL FRAMEWORKS PRESENT IN INDIA
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 features landmark victim-protective measures, improving access to justice, involvement, and reparation. Section 2(1)(y)[9] describes a victim comparatively widely, comprising legal heirs but not explicitly admitting psychological injury. Section 18(8)[10], enabling victims to have an advocate to represent them alongside the public prosecutor, suffers from the inhibition of cross-examination, cutting into their right to participate during trial proceedings. Section 173(2)[11] ensures victims receive a free FIR copy, promoting transparency, though effective dissemination remains a concern, especially in rural areas.
In appreciation of the sensitivity of sexual crimes, Section 176(1)(b)[12] enables rape victims to give statements at a place of their preference, aided by audio-video means. However, ensuring the process is supervised by trained officials is still an issue. Section 184 provides for a medical examination within 24 hours but is subject to the availability of medical infrastructure. Section 193(3)(ii)[13] grants victims updates on investigations every 90 days but lacks effective enforcement mechanisms.
Sections 395(3)[14] and 396[15] provide for a dual compensation system, allowing courts to award compensation from the accused and requiring government-funded relief through legal services authorities. Yet, practical barriers, such as offenders’ financial limitations and delays in procedure, can restrict access. Section 413[16] provides for victims’ rights to appeal acquittals, lesser convictions, and insufficient compensation, but judicial delays can obstruct timely resolution.
While BNSS 2023 enhances the rights of victims, its success depends on effective implementation, accountability, and procedural protection. A more integrated framework that includes victim assistance programs and trauma-informed judicial proceedings is necessary for the realization of substantive justice.
CASE LAWS
In the case of Maru Ram v. Union of India [17], according to Justice Iyer, victimology should not seek fulfilment through barbarity but instead focus on mandatory restitution by the wrongdoer, aiming to lessen the suffering of the victim rather than inflicting more pain on the offender.
Similarly, in the case of Dayal Singh v State of Uttaranchal[18], the Supreme Court emphasized that criminal trials serve the purpose of delivering justice to all parties involved – the accused, the society, and the victim. The court’s role is not only to ensure that innocent individuals are not wrongfully convicted but also to prevent the guilty from escaping punishment.
Elizabeth Smart’s abduction[19] showcased the trauma of kidnapping and abuse, stressing the need for victim support and strong law enforcement. The Delhi Gang Rape Case[20] sparked worldwide protests and legal changes in India, raising demands for justice and dignity for sexual violence victims.
These are cases that detail efforts and problems in the pursuit of victims’ rights worldwide. They show why the criminal justice system needs to address the rights of its victims. Such criminals must face justice, too.
CONCLUSION
In the complex world of criminology and victimology, the narrative often revolves around the dynamic interplay between the offender and the victim. The phrase “Understanding crime requires understanding people” by Simon Dinitz captures the essence of criminology, emphasizing that the roots of criminal behaviour are often intertwined with societal structures and influences.
Parallelly, victimologist Benjamin Mendelson highlighted, “The victim is not just a passive entity but an active participant in the criminal event,” acknowledging that victims, too, have roles shaped by their circumstances, sometimes inadvertently fuelling the cycle of violence. Reflecting on these perspectives reveals that both criminology and victimology are not isolated disciplines but rather the two sides of the same coin. The criminal’s motives cannot be separated from the victim’s experiences. By embracing this dual lens, we can pave the way for a more comprehensive approach to justice that balances accountability with empathy, ensuring both the offender and the victim are understood within their full societal context.
Author(s) Name: Devishi Karamchandani (Institute of Law, Nirma University, Ahmedabad)
References:
[1] Snyder v Massachusetts 291 US 97, 103 (1934)
[2] Delhi Bar Association, ‘What is Victimology and How Does it Relate to Criminology?’ https://blog.delhibarassociation.in/what-is-victimology-and-how-does-it-relate-to-criminology/ accessed 10 January 2025.
[3] Tiwari A, ‘A Study of Criminal Behaviour (Causality & Prevention of Crime)’ (2020) International Journal of Advanced Research http://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/10795 accessed 10 January 2025.
[4] Canter D and Youngs D, ‘Crime and Society’ (2016) International Research Centre for Investigative Psychology, The University of Huddersfield, https://www.hud.ac.uk accessed 10 January 2025.
[5] Daisy M Petersen, Benjamin Mendelsohn’s Theory of Victimization (Academia.edu 2017) https://www.academia.edu/31968120/Benjamin_Mendelsohn accessed 10 January 2025.
[6] Anushka Sharma, ‘Concept of Victimology in Indian Criminal Justice Administration’ (2025) IV(1) Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law 707.
[7] Hans von Hentig, The Criminal and His Victim: Studies in the Sociobiology of Crime (Yale University Press 1948).
[8]United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, ‘The Right of Victims to an Adequate Response to Their Needs’ (E4J, UNODC) https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/crime-prevention-criminal-justice/module-11/key-issues/3–the-right-of-victims-to-an-adequate-response-to-their-needs.html accessed 10 February 2025.
[9] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 2(1)(y).
[10] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 18(8).
[11] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 173(2).
[12] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 176(1)(b).
[13] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 193(3)(ii).
[14] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 395(3).
[15] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 396.
[16] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 413.
[17] Maru Ram v Union of India (1981) 1 SCC 107.
[18] Dayal Singh v State of Uttaranchal (2012) 8 SCC 263.
[19] US v Mitchell 752 F Supp 2d 1216 (D Utah 2010).
[20] Mukesh & Anr v State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors (2017) 6 SCC 1.
