1|BnW Journal – Jurispedia – Vol.

1 : Issue 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

1.

Community Corrections

By: Payal Garg

Pg. No.: 1-25

2|BnW Journal – Jurispedia – Vol. 1 : Issue 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

Abstract

Community corrections are the programs to oversee offenders outside of jail or prison. These
programs are set up for convicted adult offenders and adjudicated juveniles. These institutions
aim to ease institutional crowding and excess cost. It addresses the victim’s needs by restoring
them the justice and helps in reforming the offenders through surveillance, rehabilitation, and
other reformative programs. The various components of community corrections include
electronic monitoring, day reporting centers, and others. The programs offered by the
community corrections differ at different stages i.e. stage 1 being ‘before conviction’ and stage
2 &3 being ‘at the sentencing decision’ and ‘at re-entry’ respectively. According to Van
Keulen, the current criminal justice theory holds the various modes of sentencing such as
incapacitation, rehabilitation, deterrence, retribution, and restitution. Community corrections
offer certain theories regarding criminal behavior such as social learning theory, subcultural
theory etc. The feminist theory deals with the population of female offenders. The community
corrections results in many advantages such as reduction in costs ease in overcrowding of
prisons, boot camps, allowing the offenders to financially support themselves or their families.
Along with advantages, the community corrections have some disadvantages too. The major
one being, the public safety may be compromised as the offender stays in the community.
Community corrections result as an alternative to the prison system. Different countries have
different correctional programs. In India, there are the provisions of Bail, plea bargaining,
Probation, and many more provided by the code of criminal procedure, 1973 and also by the
Indian Constitution guaranteed by Article 21. In Nutshell, community corrections have become
the need of the hour. Without it, the criminal justice system can’t function properly.

Keywords: criminal justice system, community corrections, institutions, crime, community.

3|BnW Journal – Jurispedia – Vol. 1 : Issue 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

Table of Contents

S. No. Title Pg. No.

1. INTRODUCTION 4

1.1. Evolution of community corrections 5

1.2. Theories of community corrections 6

2. COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PROGRAMS 9

2.1. Components of community corrections 9

2.2. Types of community corrections 10

2.2.1. Before conviction 10

2.2.2. At the sentencing decision 11

2.2.3. At re-entry 13

3. COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS: AN ALTERNATIVE OF 13

INCARCERATION

3.1. Early Alternative Sanctions 14

3.2. Current Community Sanctions 15

4. CONSEQUENCES OF COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS 17

4.1. Positive consequences 17

4.2. Negative consequences 17

5. INDIA VIS-À-VIS OTHER COUNTRIES: A COMPARATIVE 18

STUDY

6. JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS 23

7. CONCLUSION 25

7.1. Suggestions & Recommendations 25

4|BnW Journal – Jurispedia – Vol. 1 : Issue 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

‘Community corrections’ is a hollow term having no particular meaning. It can differ

from person to person. For some persons, it is just related to Probation and Parole, while for
others it is more of a community service and reformative programs. Community corrections
are the programs that do not employ incarceration i.e. which do not contain the prison system.
The idea behind formulating the community corrections programs instead of incarceration is
that it is in the benefit of the society that offenders should be reformed into a good human rather
than sending them to jail or prison and punishing them for their deeds. 1

Community corrections are the programs set up for the convicted adult offenders and
adjudicated juveniles. The fact that there is not enough housing for incarcerating the offenders
is also a reason behind the setting up of community corrections. These programs aim at easing
the institutional crowding and reducing the excess cost. These programs keep in mind the need
of the victim by restoring them the justice and also helps in reforming the offender through
surveillance, rehabilitation, and other reformative programs.

Community corrections are helpful in both front-end and back-end alternatives. For the front-
end alternatives, the concept of Probation has been used to avoid further crowding in Jails and
Prisons. While, for the back-end alternatives, Parole is used as a means to act as release valves
which ease the overcrowding of the prisons by the use of early release mechanisms, where the
offender is kept under the supervision until his original sentence expires.

The essence of the community corrections lies in the re-integration of the offender in the
community. The re-integrative nature of the community corrections is crucial from both
society’s perspective and the perspective of the offender. The society can realize familial,
financial, and community benefits associated with the re-integration of the offender. First, the
employed offender becomes capable of generating payment for victim compensation, court
fines, and treatment programs. Second, the successful reintegration of the offender makes him
capable for the payment of government taxes and so the govt. can generate extra revenue. Third,
a reformed offender can contribute financially to the expenses of his/her children, parents, and

1
Hanser, R. D. (2019). Essentials of community corrections. Sage Publications, Inc.
5|BnW Journal – Jurispedia – Vol. 1 : Issue 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

their expenses. Apart from these benefits, the offender may also be involved in some religious
activities, volunteer activities, or even may participate in the anticrime activities to help
reducing the crime likely to be committed by the youth.

Community corrections are considered to be an important aspect of the Criminal Justice System
by the passage of time.

1.1 Evolution of Community Corrections

The history of the Community corrections can be traced back to the United States. In the
USA, there are two offenders on Probation or Parole per every individual serving time in
the prison. In Community corrections, many evidence-based practices are yielded that are
proven successful in reducing recidivism and are much cheaper than incarceration. In the
USA, the concept of ‘recognizance’ emerged as a popular measure in the 19 th century.
‘Recognizance’ as a corrective measure referred to the release of the guilty offender
because of his regret. It is generally applicable in the case of a juvenile. Recognizance
plays a dual role, on the one hand, it allows the offender to escape from the complete
criminal liability and on the other hand, it reserves the right of the court to punish the
offender from the original crime if the offender commits any further violation. 2

The traces of community corrections can be found in England in the early 18 th century
where the judges were at discretion to sentence ‘judicial reprieve’ as a mode of
punishment. ‘Judicial reprieve’ is a form of punishment where the offender is convicted
of a crime while his/her freedom of citizenship still sustains.

In India
During the Hindu and Mughal period in India, the reformation of the offender was not
considered as a mode of punishment. The offenders were given only deterrence based
punishment such as hanging, flogging, whipping, branding, and starving to death or death
sentence. Prisons were considered to be a torturous place. In the British era, the prison
reforms were given a little significance. With the prison reforms, corrective measures were
also introduced as a part of the reformative system.

2
Van, D. (1983). Criminology and criminal justice. University Of Cape Town.
6|BnW Journal – Jurispedia – Vol. 1 : Issue 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

Open prisons was adopted as the first corrective measure to reform the offenders. The
concept of open prisons was first appreciated by the honorable Supreme Court in the case
of Ramamurthy v. State of Karnataka3. Dacoits, rapists, and thieves were not entitled to
open prisons. India has many other corrective measures such as Parole, Probation, and
many other programs too.

1.2 Theories of Community Corrections

There are many theories related to community corrections. The basic aim behind the
introduction of these corrective theories is to analyze the criminological and psychological
perspectives of the community corrections programs. The theories ascertain the social
behavior of the offender while complying with the sentence given to them under the
community corrections programs.
The major theories of community corrections are:

1) Routine activities theory

As the title itself specifies, this theory focuses on analyzing the routine activities
of the offender. The duty under this theory is imposed upon the law enforcement
authorities and the community corrections personnel. The duty of both the
authorities is interlinked. Firstly, the law enforcement authorities shall determine
the “hot spot” areas i.e. areas that are more prone to the commission of a crime and
then the corrections personnel shall take measures by restricting the offenders who
are on Probation or Parole from entering into such hot spot areas and commit a
crime.
The theory is based on the threefold notion:
i) The offender must be in the vicinity of the victim.
ii) Such an offense shall occur as a result of the routine activities that take
place between the offender and the victim.
iii) There shall not be any guardian who might impede the criminal behavior.

The authorities shall focus on re-integrating the offender into the community
without adhering to any illegal activity themselves.

3
(1997) 2 SCC 642 (659)
7|BnW Journal – Jurispedia – Vol. 1 : Issue 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

2) Social learning theory

This theory specifies the behavior of the offender that he adopts from the society
or by vicarious reinforcement. The vicarious reinforcement is based on the
discerning capacity of the individual where he imitates himself in the position of
the others. Also, the offender establishes his behavior based on the reward or
punishment that he receives in his life. This theory makes it clear how a person
learns criminal behavior from his surroundings.

3) Sub-cultural theory
This theory is an extension of the social learning theory. This theory specifies that
in some areas criminal behavior is acquired as a valuable norm. In some areas, the
criminal activities tend to take place comparatively more than the other areas and
hence the offender learns the criminal activities from one particular location,
disturbing the proportionate crime ratio of the locality. In such cases, it becomes
necessary to separate the particular offender from the family or even the
community. There are many female offenders too who get indulged in the sexual
exploitation in the influence of drugs. The treatment of such offenders is to exclude
them from the community and to put them in the community corrections programs
for their reformation as a decent human being.

4) Social disorganization theory

This theory claims that crime generally occurs in a disorganized society. The
societies which lack the community support to fight against the criminal element
are more likely to be more prone to criminal activities. Society generally includes
law-abiding citizens who do not indulge in any criminal activity but they are too
intimidated by the others committing criminal acts that they can’t take any action
to prevent such activities.
8|BnW Journal – Jurispedia – Vol. 1 : Issue 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

5) Strain theory
This theory talks about the strain that an individual gets by the pressure that comes
with the non-fulfillment of the success goals set up by the individual. This strain
often tends the individual to get involved in criminal behavior. The offenders
usually aim to achieve unrealistic goals and also they are not taught the skills to
achieve the goals in one go which ultimately leads to shaking of their conscience.
The personnel shall make a realistic assessment of the situation and then guide the
offender accordingly.

6) Labeling theory
As per labeling theory, once the offender is labeled as ‘criminal’, ‘offender’,
‘convict’ etc., he becomes stabilized in that role. The label affects the stigma of the
individual to an extent that he accepts himself as an offender or criminal and this
self-acceptance becomes an impediment in the way of him reforming himself as a
better human being. The authorities shall try not to label the criminal term with the
offender to make him feel a little better about himself

7) Feminist theory
This theory typically talks about the female offender. While talking about
assistance, female offender gets priority over the male offenders. But, the
patriarchy system still sustains in some areas where the needs of the men is put
over that of a woman. Female is the element of victimization which is generally
sexual. The community corrections programs shall aim at providing rehabilitation
for such victimized female offenders and shall secure their interest against the men.
9|BnW Journal – Jurispedia – Vol. 1 : Issue 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

CHAPTER 2

Community Corrections Programs

Community corrections are generally described as court-ordered sanctions in which the

offender serves at least a part of the sentence in the community. To pull off this criterion of
sentence serving various community corrections programs are introduced. A community
correction program aims to attain goals like the ease in institutional crowding, reduction of
costs, and reformation of offenders by re-integrating them into the community.

The notion of community corrections rests upon three assumptions:

1. Not everyone who breaks the law is dangerous or violent. The offender shall be allowed
to revamp the harm he has done. He shall be allowed to be put in employment and
manage his familial relationships by staying in the community.
2. The community sentence seeks to root out the behavior of the offender about why he
committed the offense. The community correction provides various programs that are
accessible to the offender in the community rather than in jail or prison.
3. The people incarcerated in prison mutate well when they are released with superior
supervision.

2.1 Components of Community Corrections

The major components of Community Corrections profiteering include:

1) Electronic Monitoring
EM includes various software systems that track down the location of the offender
every 15-16 seconds such as GPS (Global Positioning System). This may include wrist
bracelets, voice verification systems, drug and alcohol testing devices etc. This
technology is used for both front-end and back-end offenders. If the person has
impaired the device or is not in an approved location, the alarm rings giving the
information of the same to the supervising authorities.
10 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

2) Day reporting centers

Day reporting centers are the centers where the offender is required to participate in the
wraparound activities during the day time, while giving them the liberty to go back to
their homes at night. These programs operate as ‘one-stop-shop’. Originally, the
offenders used to visit to the day reporting centers once a day to their Probation or
Parole officer, but with the enhancement of the technology, the offender can check in
from a remote location through an electronic device via kiosk.

3) Intermediate sanction facilities

These facilities claim that if there is any technical violation of the conditions of the
Parole or Probation such as a positive drug test, missed appointments with the Probation
or Parole officer, further violent act etc. then the community sentence can be revoked
and the offender can be sent back to the prison or jail. These facilities are usually set
up for a shorter period such as 90-180 days to determine the nature of the violation and
to give counseling and treatment to the offender.

4) Residential re-entry centers

They are commonly referred to as ‘halfway houses’ focuses on providing housing to
the early release prisoners or those released on Parole. These centers also help in the
reintegration of the offender in the community by providing them the employment
opportunities and financial education counseling and guiding them on moral ethics
about how to live in the community.

2.2 Types of Community Corrections

The Community Corrections programs differ at different stages of sentencing. The different
stages of the community correction programs are as follows:

2.2.1 Before Conviction

On the commission of the crime, the police arrest a suspect and if the prosecution office
frames a charge against the suspect then he/she shall be called as the “pre-trial
11 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

defendant”. While some suspects are released on their recognizance, those who are not
released shall be dealt with correctional measures. Community Correction programs
before conviction are:

a) Pre-trial Supervision: It is a court-ordered sanction where the defendant is not

convicted but enters into an agreement with the court to appear on the next scheduled
date and that on the fulfillment of the required conditions, the charges against him
shall be dismissed completely. It allows the pre-trial defendant to look after his family
needs and also to assist his lawyer in the preparation of the case.
The court-ordered sanctions include scheduling of appointments, regular mental
health evaluation, avoiding contact with victims, and restriction on further criminal
activities. If the pre-trial defendant violates the terms of the court order then his
conviction shall become permanent.

b) Electronic Monitoring: As discussed earlier, electronic monitoring allows the

community corrections authorities to keep an eye on the released offender. It tracks
down the location of the offender on Probation or Parole and submits the information
to the supervisory authority.

c) House arrest: This program ensures that the offender stays at his or her home for a
certain specified period. It can be ensured through the help of electronic monitoring
whereby the location of the offender can be easily tracked down through this
technological device.

2.2.2 At the sentencing decision

The various Community Correction Programs at the sentencing decision are:

a) Probation Supervision:
It is the most commonly used Community Correction practice. India adopted the
concept of Community Corrections in the year 1958 via “The Probation of Offenders
12 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

Act, 1958”. Under this program, the probation officer must collect the data about the
offender and forward it to the court and then the court can decide about the validity
of the Probation.
The offender is allowed to stay in the community on the fulfillment of the various
conditions such as full-time employment, court permission before leaving its
jurisdiction, avoiding interaction with persons having criminal background, and
appearing before the court when called upon.

b) Day Reporting Centers: As discussed earlier, Day Reporting Centers are the
institutions where the offender who is released on correctional program shall report
at least once a day to the concerned authorities.

c) Community Drug Treatment Programs: These programs are set up for the
offenders having a problem with drugs or alcohol. These institutions require the
offender to visit 1-3 times a week to the authorities. The programs are tailored for
chronic abusers and the occasional abusers including ways to deal with cravings and
stress. They provide medication which produces a negative reaction when the alcohol
is ingested in the body. Sometimes, they take the help of the family as a support
system in the drug treatment of the offender.

d) Restitution: Restitution is the mode of compensating the victim by the offender for
the harm caused. Earlier, the offender used to escape the liability of restitution if he
has been sentenced to jail or any other form of punishment but with the passage of
the time, the victim demanded that the restitution be paid to them irrespective of the
fact that whether the offender is incarcerated or not. Hence, restitution is generally
made to the victim. India adopted the concept of the “Victim Compensation scheme”
in the year 2009 under The Coe of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

e) Correctional Boot Camps: Boot camps are formulated for the young felony
offenders. It allows them the chance to rebuild their character by spending 90-180
days in the boot camp. These programs are based on military training programs such
as digging, draining swamps, facility maintenance, cutting firewood for elderly
citizens etc.
13 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

These are some of the major programs. The offender can be released based on other
reformative programs such as community service or by paying the fine for the less heinous
offense.

2.2.3 At Re-entry

Community Correction programs help the offenders during their re-entry in the
community after they have served the sentence in prison. Some of the re-entry programs
are:
a) Pre-Release Facility: A Pre-Release Facility commonly known as halfway houses,
community centers, and residential community correction facilities, allows the
offender to adjust in a freedom-based environment. The offender can save money and
earn an independent living on Parole. The Pre-release facilities allows the passes to
the offenders for some specific reasons including job searching, building family
relationship, find affordable housing, obtain a bus pass etc.

b) Parole and Post-Release Supervision: This program focuses on the discretionary

release of an offender on Parole for a certain reason such as Housing, employment
etc. by the Parole Board consisting of 3-12 members. The board decides who will
stay in the prison and who can be released on the parole. On the other hand, in the
post-release program, the officers must release a person after he has served a
percentage of his sentence in Prison.

CHAPTER 3

Community Corrections: An Alternative of Incarceration

A man is not a born criminal. He shall be given the right to reform himself into a better human
being. Earlier, incarceration (commonly known as the Prison system) was considered to be the
major mode of punishing the offenders. There are many problems associated with
incarceration. The primary one being there are chances of higher recidivism, i.e. the chances
14 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

that after being released from prison, the offender may again get involved in the criminal
activities. Also, the spacing is not enough in the prison to provide shelter to every offender.
Moreover, the prisoners are always in danger of getting hurt by the other heinous offenders.
Prisons were not considered as cost-friendly for the authorities. Keeping in mind the above
issues, it was settled that there is a need to set up the institutions that help the offender in his
reformation and is also useful for the institutions. However, some alternatives to incarceration
existed in the previous years too and the correctional programs got modified with the passage
of the time.

3.1 Early Alternative Sanctions

Early Alternative Sanctions are the Correctional programs used by the authorities in the
old times for sentencing the offenders. The Early Alternative Sanctions include:

1) Sanctuary
Sanctuary as a mode of sanction was of two types. The first one was secular and
the second one was strictly implemented in the case of Christians. Sanctuary was
the majorly used mode of leniency. It required the offender to flee from the
particular cities and get settled somewhere else with a Sine Qua Non that he shall
not return to the place where he committed the crime, without the explicit
permission of the crown. And, if he so returns then he shall be granted immediate
punishment.

2) Benefit of Clergy
The benefit of clergy was a mode of punishing the members of the various churches
including clerics, monks, and nuns. It required the offending church representative
to be sent to the church authorities for punishment. It was the concept that emerged
in England where ecclesiastical courts were set up to deal with the offender. By
this mode, the offender could escape the full punishment. It was more of a political
power program and those who were financially well-off could only be able to get
the benefit of this sanction.

3) Judicial Reprieve
15 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

The concept of Judicial Reprieve emerged in England in the late 18th century.
Judicial Reprieve used to be a discretionary power of the judges where a judge can
suspend a sentence where he feels that incarceration is not necessary. It is generally
offered to the person who has committed some minor offense or who did not have
any prior criminal record. Once the period of suspension expires, the offender had
to apply to the crown for a complete pardon of the case. In India, ‘the president
holds the power of judicial reprieve and pardoning’4.

4) Recognizance
Recognizance as a mode of sanction was generated in the United States through a
famous case5 where the Judge Peter Oxenbridge Thacher suspended the imposition
of the sentence on a woman guilty on her plea. The defendant assured the court to
appear before the court on the next scheduled date and hence she was released on
her recognizance.

3.2 Current Community Sanctions

As the time passes by, the authorities executed some more Community Correction
Programs. While some of the Community Correction Programs are discussed in Chapter
2.2 of this paper, the other currently used Community sanctions are:

 Discharge
If the law does not prescribe any mandatory minimum punishment, the judges are
at discretion to offer the offender an absolute or conditional discharge. The source6
of this authority lies in The Code of Criminal procedure, 1973. If the absolute
discharge is granted then there is no criminal record against the accused and if the
conditional discharge is granted, then there will be no criminal record if the
accused adhere to the conditions of the discharge.

4
Article 72 of The Constitution of India
5
Commonwealth v. Chase, (1830)
6
Section 239 and 245 of The Code of Criminal procedure, 1973
16 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

 Suspended sentence
A suspended order can also be ordered along with the term of probation. If the
offender contravenes the provisions of the order then he shall be brought back
before the court. The court may impose a new sentence at this stage and also he
may be liable for breaching the Probation order.

 Probation and admonition7

The offender can be released on his good conduct or by giving him the warning
not to commit any further offense.

 Community service
The offender can be released for giving services to the community such as seeking
employment; this will ultimately help the government as the number of taxpayers
will get increased in the community.

 Fine
In case of less heinous offenses, the offender can be released on the payment of a
specified amount in the court as a fine and with a personal bond that he shall not
commit any further offense.

Some of the already discussed correctional programs include Restitution, Boot camps, Drug
tests etc.

7
Section 360 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
17 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

CHAPTER 4

Consequences of Community Corrections

As every coin has two faces, similarly Community Corrections have both Positive and Negative
consequences.

4.1 Positive Consequences

1. Community Corrections are cost-friendly. They are much cheaper compared to jail or
prison. Offenders can continue financially supporting themselves and their families by
staying in the Community.
2. Ease in overcrowding of prison facilities by allowing the convicted offenders to
involve in reformative programs such as drug programs, boot camps, etc.
3. Community Correction programs are flexible. They can be used at any stage of the trial.
They can be used during pre-trial, at the time of sentencing, and post-trial too.
4. It protects the offenders from exposing them to the risk of getting hurt by other prison
inmates.

4.2 Negative Consequences

1. It may cause a situation of net widening i.e. it may include the offenders who should
have received less severe sentences. This situation arises when the judges and
prosecutors fill up the program spaces with the offender not requiring such a higher
degree of care.
2. Public safety may be compromised. While the offender stays in the community, he may
probably indulge in criminal activities again.
3. The non-functioning of the programs in a proper way such as missing daily
attendance, non-use of electronic devices, rare drug tests etc. may destroy the purpose
of setting up of the correctional programs.
18 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

CHAPTER 5

India vis-à-vis other countries: A Comparative study

Incarceration has failed to minimize the crime rate across the globe despite being the most
commonly used method of punishment. The Prison system in various countries including India
fails to provide proper accommodation facilities, health care facilities, conducting reformative
programs for the treatment of offenders resulting in various repercussions. Construction of
more prisons will also not provide an amicable solution. Prison damages the mental and
sociological health of the offender making the re-integration process more difficult and
challenging.

However, there are some countries which put Rehabilitation before punishment such as:

 Ethiopia – Financial literacy for Prisoners

 Slovenia – Working for the weekend
 Uruguay – Working and studying behind bars
 Poland – Making minimum wage for Prisoners
 India – Study for free
 Italy – Reading for freedom

Here is the comparative analysis of the criminal justice system of various countries.

A. INDIA
In India, various alternatives to imprisonment are provided by The Indian Penal Code,
18600, and by The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In India 8, the correctional measures
are permitted at three different stages i.e. pre-trial, sentencing, and post-trial stage.

8
Siddique, A., & Afzal, M. (2017). Ahmad Siddique’s criminology, penology & victimology. Eastern Book
Company.
19 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

1. Pre-trial stage
The pre-trial stage is the stage where there is no establishment of case. It is the stage
where the matter is still under the process of investigation but the alleged accused is
suspected of the offense committed.

(i) Bail: Bail is the most commonly used pre-trial detention alternative. Bail
allows a person accused of an offense to be released on bail on his bond with
or without sureties. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 also ensures the
right to bail under Chapter XXXIII of the Code. The Supreme Court through a
case held that ‘Bail is rule and jail is an exception’9. Reaffirmed by the Supreme
Court in the case of Moti Ram & Ors. V. State of M.P. 10

(ii) Time limit on pre-trial detention: The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental
right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. However, The
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 also contains provisions regarding the limit
on detention of offenders in custody. The authority to effectuate the right of
speedy trial is accessed from the Sections 258, 309, and 311 of the Cr.P.C.

Section 167 of Cr.P.C. provides the maximum limit of 60 or 90 days for the
detention of a person in the custody before the filing of the charge sheet.
However, there is no upper limit for detention after filing of the charge sheet.
To prevent the accused from this mockery in the criminal justice system, an
Amendment was made in the year 2006 by adding Section 436-A which
specifies the maximum time limit in custody for under trial prisoners.

(iii) Plea Bargaining: The concept of ‘Plea Bargaining’11 enshrined in Chapter

XXI-A consisting of Sections 265A-265L was added in the Cr.P.C. In India,
we have the concept of sentence bargaining unlike England, where there is
Charge bargaining. Plea bargaining is permissible only when the offense is not
punishable for more than 7 years. It is not allowed when the offense is
committed against Women and Children.

9
State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay, (1977)
10
1978 AIR 1594
11
The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2005
20 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

(iv) Diversion: Diversion implies parting from the criminal justice process and
involving in community correction programs for the rehabilitation of the
offender.

There are some other pre-trial sanctions such as: Free Legal aid guaranteed by section
304 of Cr.P.C. and also by The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, Compounding of
offenses under Section 320 of Cr.P.C and non-penal fines.

2. Sentencing stage
It is the trial stage where charges have been made and the arguments are made on
admission and denial of charges framed. Alternatives used during the sentencing stage
are:
(i) Compensation: The court may order the offender to pay to the victim under
section 357 to 359 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 any amount of
money as compensation as the court thinks fit.

(ii) Probation and Admonition: section 360 of The Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 deals with releasing the offender on probation or Admonition. It is granted
to first time offenders in case of minor offense committed. Probation is granted
on the condition of good conduct and admonition is granted by giving a
warning to behave well after his/her release.

(iii) Community-based Sentence: The court may grant the offender a community-
based sentence where the offender serves his sentence by staying in the
community. This process is used for the reintegration of the offender in the
community.

The Court may also grant absolute discharge or conditional discharge as the form of
correctional measure as discussed earlier too.

3. Post Sentencing stage

21 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

It is the stage after the trial has come to an end. To avoid incarceration and the re-
integration of the offender in the society, the criminal justice system has adopted
various alternatives at the post-sentencing stage too. These alternatives are:

(i) Parole: Parole is a conditional suspension of the sentence for a shorter duration
to allow the offender to take care of their personal affairs such as family needs,
harvesting etc. it is allowed only in case of emergent needs.

(ii) Remission of sentence: Remission can be granted by the Head of the prison or
by the State Government as an incentive for maintaining peace in the prison
and for keeping good behavior.

The other post-sentencing alternatives include Pardon and Open Prisons as discussed
previously through this paper.

B. UNITED STATES

The Criminal justice system of the USA 12 has various correctional measures for offenders.
USA adopted the process of Community Corrections back in the 1800s. The system was
not much developed during that era. The major alternatives to incarceration were
Sanctuary, Benefit of Clergy, Judicial Reprieve, and Recognizance. These alternatives
are discussed in Chapter 3.2 of this paper.

With time, the federal Courts of USA demanded a proper system of Probation, and hence
The Probation Act of 1925 was enacted signed by the then President Calvin Coolidge
where the prisoners were released from the prison-based on some superior supervision. In
the United States, John Augustus is considered as the father of modern Probation. In 1907,
New York became the first state in the United States to adopt Parole as a correctional
measure. By the end of 1942, the entire country and the federal government adopted the
Parole system.

12
Bosworth, M. (2002). The U.S. federal prison system. Sage Publications.
22 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

C. UNITED KINGDOM

“Reducing crime – Changing lives” is the objective of the Prisons in England. The National
Offender Management Service (NOMS) in England is an Executive Agency that works
under the Ministry of Justice in the United Kingdom. The NOMS aims to rehabilitate the
offender by sentencing them into Custodial Prison or Community sentence by keeping in
mind the safety of the public as there are chances of recidivism. England enacted The
English Penal Servitude Act of 1853 which used to provide various rehabilitation
programs to deal with the convicts.

With the view of adopting the Probation as a correctional measure in the United Kingdom,
The Probation of Offenders Act. 1907 was enacted by the Parliament of the United
Kingdom. To release the Prisoners on Parole, Parole Board was constructed for England
and Wales. Parole Board is governed by the Parole Board Rules 2016 formulated by the
Parliament of the UK under The Criminal Justice Act, 2003.

D. RUSSIA

Earlier in Russia, the offenders were dealt with by the Main Prison administration off the
Russian Interior Ministry set up on 27 February 1879. The Department then got shifted to
the Russian federation in 2006 which introduced dealing with prisoners with correctional
measures. The federation emphasized on the preparation of the Correctional system to be
enforced in an emergency. It suggested the need for protecting the territorial security to the
public where correctional programs are to take place.
Russia focuses on using open prisons as a correctional measure. Probation as a means of
Community corrections is authorized by Article 73 of The Russian Criminal Code. Pardon
was introduced in Russia in 1992 and the prisoners became eligible for parole in 2017.

E. AUSTRALIA

Australia used to serve the penal colony of Britain from 1787 until 1852. The Prisoners
from America, Britain were sent to Australia. 750 convicts were transported to Australia
23 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

by cargo in the first instance. Australia had the concept of ‘ticket-of-leave’ proposed by
Maconochie wherein, the convict was permitted to leave in return for his good conduct.

Australia has no unified correctional system. It differs from state to state. It is the
responsibility of State and Territorial governments in Australia to look after the correctional
system, to keep a check on the rehabilitative activities. The Community Corrections
provides various benefits to the offender and the authorities too. It lights up the burden of
the incarceration authorities and it helps the offender in seeking a personal life for himself.

CHAPTER 6

Judicial Pronouncements

With the enhancement in the Criminal Justice System, Correctional measures have now been
considered as a major part of sentencing by the courts also. Some of the case laws supporting
Correctional measures in India are:

 Ramamurthy v. State of Karnataka13

In this case, the Supreme Court openly appreciated the concept of ‘Open Prisons’ as a
Correctional measure which is a departure from Incarceration. The Court held that
“though open prisons create their problems i.e. of management issue, the good of the
society lies in the coming out of the offender from jail as a reformed person and hence
the managerial issue is not of much concern. To start with, this can be done at all the
District Headquarters of the Country”.

 Ramji Missar v. State of Bihar14

In this case, the Supreme Court emphasized on adopting ‘Probation’ as a Community

Correction measure. The Court held that the objective of The Probation of offenders

13
(1997) 2 SCC 642 (659)
14
AIR 1963 SC 1088
24 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

Act is to separate the young offenders from the hardened criminals. The aim is to reform
them. In the concept of Probation, there is no sentence; the offender just stays in the
supervision of the authority. Though section 360 of CrPC also deals with Probation but
it has some lacunas to be filled up by the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
The provisions of the Act of 1958 and section 360 of CrPC will not apply to the
Prevention of Corruption Act.15

 Hiralal Mallick v. State of Bihar16

The Supreme Court in this case highlighted the ‘Parole’ as a Community Correction
measure. The SC held that a prisoner may become de-humanized if his family ties are
splintered for long and that is why he shall be released on Parole periodically.

Some cases of the United States dealing with Community Corrections are:

 People v. Wilhite17
The Judgment was delivered by the Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc on October
7, 1991. The Supreme Court granted placement in the Community Correction facility
to the class 4 felony offender.

 Davenport v. Pikes Peak18

Judgment was delivered by the Supreme Court of Colorado En Banc on June 29, 1998.
The Supreme Court granted Probation to the offender who committed second-degree
burglary and who was earlier rejected by the Community Correction facility.

15
State of T.N. v. Kaliaperuma , (2005) 12 SCC 473
16
(1977) 4 SCC 44
17
817 p.2d 1017 (1991)
18
962 p.2d 963 (1998)
25 | B n W J o u r n a l – J u r i s p e d i a – V o l . 1 : I s s u e 3
EQ. Citation: BNWJ-0920-099

CHAPTER 7

Conclusion

It is a well-established phenomenon that no society is free of crime. We can never get

rid of the crime no matter how rigorous the law is. Procedures shall be adopted to reform the
offender into a social being so that he can contribute in his best possible way towards his family
and society. The idea of “Hate Crime not Criminal” shall be adopted. A criminal shall not be
severed from the society rather he shall be provided treatment so that recidivism can be
avoided.

Community corrections have come a long way. The process of re-integration shall not be
jeopardized at any cost. There are different shapes and methods of each correctional measure
and the community supervision functions shall be adopted very wisely. The members of the
Community may be added to the supervision facility as they help assist in the re-integration of
the offenders.

7.1 Suggestions & Recommendations

Here are some suggestions for the better implementation of the Community Corrections
and the much finer rejuvenation of the offender in the community:

 Regular assessment of the offenders in the Community Correction facility.

 Implementation of the supervision functions under the control of experts.
 Reformation and no punishment shall be the motto.
 Cruel behavior shall be avoided with the victims.
 First-time offenders shall be separated from the hardened criminals.
 Family ties shall not be severed.
 Programs and events shall be conducted to purify the moral and mental health of the
offender.