‘Punish the guilty for their crimes, not their poverty’ 

‘Punish the guilty for their crimes, not their poverty’ 

Context

A convict’s poverty should not be the reason for him to spend years in prison even after serving a substantial prison sentence, that too, merely because he is unable to pay the fine amount the criminal court had imposed on him, the Supreme Court said in a humanitarian judgment

SC’s views

• Take financial condition of the convict into consideration: The financial condition of the convict after a long period of incarceration and the plight of his “innocent” family should be taken into consideration to prevent, if at least reduce, the time he would spend behind bars for not being able to pay the fine imposed on him at the time of sentencing by the trial court

Justice Kurian’s views

• Citing a 2013 apex court judgment, Justice Kurian observed that suffering another extended period of imprisonment solely due to inability to pay the fine because of poverty causes serious prejudice not only to the convict but also to his family

What happens when a convict is not able to pay a fine?

• Penal laws, besides sentencing a person to prison, also mandate him to pay a fine, which could run to lakhs of rupees, as punishment. If the fine is not paid, or if the convict cannot afford it, as an alternative, he is made to suffer another prison term of up to one-fourth of the period of his substantial sentence. This second prison term for defaulting in payment of fine begins immediately after his substantial sentence for the crime committed comes to an end