Criminals: Born or made?

A person does not take birth as a criminal. Rather, circumstances and situations turn a person into a criminal. This concept has been reiterated by none other than a hallowed institution like the Supreme Court of India in the course of a recent hearing. In the words of the apex court, “Criminals are not born out but made.” A bench of the top court, comprising justices JB Pardiwla and Ujjwal Bhuyan, made this remark while hearing the bail plea of an accused whose trial has been on pause for the last four years. They also said that while the human potential in everyone is good, one should never write off any criminal as beyond redemption. As the two learned judges said, this humanist fundamental is often missed when dealing with delinquents, juvenile and adult. The Supreme Court has also very rightfully observed that when a crime is committed, a variety of factors are responsible for motivating the offender to commit the crime. Those factors may be social and economic; they may be the result of value erosion or parental neglect; they may be because of the stress of circumstances; or they may be the manifestation of temptations in a milieu of affluence contrasted with indigence or other privations. The observations of the two judges came within about six months of another senior Supreme Court judge, Sanjiv Khanna, saying in January that criminals are made by circumstances. According to him, no one is born as a criminal but is often pushed down the path of committing a crime as a result of the consequences of their experiences and circumstances, which are mostly shaped by neglect, external influences, or a lack of guidance. It is important to note that this issue of what makes a criminal—birth or circumstances—has remained a subject of debate between scholars and researchers across the globe for decades. While there are differing viewpoints, it is generally recognised that criminal behaviour is the outcome of a combination of biological and social factors. Again, when it comes to circumstances, there seems to be no shortage of circumstances to blame: weakened, chaotic, or broken families, ineffective schools, antisocial gangs, racism, poverty, unemployment, and so on. But, while scholars have not abandoned the sociological factors, it is increasingly becoming clear that crime is the outcome of an interaction between social factors and certain biological factors, particularly for those who, through repeated crimes, have made public places dangerous. And the debate goes on, notwithstanding the fact that every saint has a past and every sinner has a future.