CHAPTER – III

THEORIES OF CRIME

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Theories of crime provide a comprehensive framework for understanding

criminal behavior, exploring the underlying causes, motivations, and societal
influences that lead individuals to commit crimes. Crime is not a random or isolated
phenomenon but is shaped by biological, psychological, sociological, economic, and
environmental factors. Over time, scholars and criminologists have developed
various theories to explain why crime occurs, how it can be prevented, and what
legal and social responses are most effective in dealing with offenders. The classical
school of criminology, pioneered by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham,
introduced the idea that crime is a rational choice influenced by the perceived
benefits and consequences of criminal actions. In contrast, biological theories, such
as Cesare Lombroso’s theory of atavism, suggested that criminals are born with
inherent traits that make them prone to unlawful behavior. 1

As criminology evolved, psychological theories, including Freud’s

psychoanalytic theory, explored how mental health, personality disorders, and
cognitive dysfunctions contribute to criminal tendencies. Meanwhile, sociological
perspectives, such as Merton’s strain theory and Sutherland’s differential association
theory, argued that crime results from social structures, peer influences, and
economic disparities. Economic theories of crime, particularly Marxist and rational
choice theories, view criminal acts as a response to financial incentives, class
struggles, and economic inequalities. In modern times, advancements in technology
and globalization have led to the emergence of cybercrime theories, feminist
criminology, and routine activity theory, highlighting how digitalization, gender
roles, and environmental opportunities influence crime rates. 2Each of these theories
provides a unique lens through which crime can be analyzed, contributing to the

1
N.V. Paranjape , Criminology & Penology 112 (Central Law Publications , Allahabad , 19th
edn., 2023).
2
Id. at 114.

58
development of effective law enforcement strategies, criminal justice policies, and
rehabilitation programs. By integrating various criminological perspectives,
policymakers and legal authorities can formulate comprehensive crime prevention
measures that address the root causes of criminal behavior while ensuring justice and
societal stability.

3.2 CLASSICAL THEORY OF CRIME

The Classical Theory of Crime is one of the earliest and most influential
criminological theories, developed during the 18th century Enlightenment period. It
was primarily advocated by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, who argued that
crime is a rational act committed by individuals based on free will and personal
choice. This theory emerged as a reaction against the harsh, arbitrary, and cruel
punishments of the medieval justice system, where torture and death sentences were
commonly used without proper legal procedures. The Classical School of
Criminology introduced the idea that laws should be clear, punishments should be
proportionate to the crime, and justice should be swift and certain to serve as an
effective deterrent. 3The Classical Theory of Crime laid the groundwork for modern
criminal justice systems by advocating for fair, predictable, and proportionate legal
frameworks. Although it has limitations, its principles remain central to deterrence-
based legal policies and law enforcement strategies worldwide.4

3.2.1 Key Principles of Classical Theory

Following are the Key Principles of Classical Theory -

• Crime as a Rational Choice – Criminals are rational beings who commit

crimes after weighing the potential benefits and consequences.
• Free Will – Individuals have complete control over their actions and must be
held accountable for their decisions.
• Deterrence through Punishment – Punishment should be certain, swift, and
proportionate to deter crime effectively.

3
Sutherland & Cressey, Principles of Criminology 78 (Tata McGraw-Hill, 18th edn., 2022).
4
Id. at 82.

59
 • Equality before the Law – The law should treat all individuals equally,
regardless of their social or economic status.
• Utilitarianism – Laws should aim to maximize social happiness and
minimize harm, ensuring that punishments serve the greater good.

3.2.2 Contributions of Cesare Beccaria

Cesare Beccaria, an Italian philosopher and economist, is regarded as the

father of modern criminology due to his ground-breaking work, "On Crimes and
Punishments" (1764). His ideas were instrumental in reforming criminal laws and
eliminating cruel punishments. Beccaria strongly opposed torture and capital
punishment, arguing that they were ineffective, inhumane, and unjust. He believed
that torture often led to false confessions, as innocent people subjected to severe pain
might admit to crimes they did not commit. Similarly, he criticized the death penalty,
stating that long-term imprisonment would serve as a more effective deterrent than
execution. According to Beccaria, the certainty of punishment was more important
than its severity—a mild but guaranteed punishment discourages crime more than a
harsh but rarely enforced one. His views influenced many legal systems, leading to
the gradual abolition of torture and capital punishment in several countries.5

Beccaria also emphasized the importance of clear and written laws. He

argued that laws should be accessible and publicly known so that people understand
what constitutes a crime and what punishments to expect. He proposed that
punishments should be proportionate to the crime, ensuring that minor offenses
receive lighter penalties while severe crimes warrant harsher but reasonable
sentences. His idea of "proportionality in sentencing" is still a fundamental principle
in modern criminal justice systems. 6Additionally, Beccaria introduced the concept
of rehabilitation, suggesting that punishments should focus on reforming offenders
rather than inflicting pain. His work laid the foundation for fair trials, legal

5
Harry Elmer Barnes & Negley K. Teeters, New Horizons in Criminology 245 (Prentice-Hall,
3rd edn., 2021).
6
S.K. Chatterjee, Criminology: Crime and Criminal Justice 89 (S. Chand Publishing, 6th edn.,
2022).

60
transparency, and standardized punishments, which later influenced the French
Revolution, European legal reforms, and the modern penal system.

3.2.3 Contributions of Jeremy Bentham

Jeremy Bentham, an English philosopher and jurist, expanded on Beccaria’s

ideas through his Utilitarian Theory of Crime and Punishment. Bentham’s principle
of utilitarianism argued that laws should aim to achieve "the greatest happiness for
the greatest number." He believed that punishment should be rational and serve a
social purpose, meaning it should prevent crime rather than simply inflict suffering
on offenders. He introduced the concept of "hedonistic calculus", which suggests
that people make decisions based on maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain.
Bentham proposed that punishment should be structured in a way that outweighs the
benefits of committing a crime, making criminal behaviour irrational and
unappealing.7

Bentham also contributed to modern prison systems through his concept of

the Panopticon, a circular prison structure designed to allow constant surveillance of
inmates without their knowledge. The Panopticon was meant to ensure that prisoners
felt they were always being watched, encouraging self-discipline and behavioural
reform. Although this exact design was not widely implemented, it influenced
modern prison architecture and correctional policies, reinforcing the idea that
surveillance and structured discipline can aid in crime prevention. Bentham’s ideas
on legal reforms, proportional punishments, and prison management played a crucial
role in shaping contemporary criminology, policing strategies, and rehabilitation
efforts.8

3.3 NEOCLASSICAL THEORY OF CRIME

The Neoclassical Theory of Crime emerged as a modification of the Classical

Theory of Crime, addressing some of its limitations. While the Classical School, led

7
Jeremy Bentham, Utilitarian Theory of Crime and Punishment, Wikipedia , Available at:
………. .https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Bentham (last visited March 01, 2025).
8
H.L.A. Hart, Punishment and Responsibility 67 (Oxford University Press, 2nd edn., 2023).

61
by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, viewed crime as a rational choice based
on free will, the Neoclassical School introduced the idea that certain factors, such as
mental illness, age, and situational circumstances, can influence criminal behaviour.
This theory developed in the 19th century as criminologists and legal scholars
recognized that not all offenders act purely out of rational self-interest—some may
be driven by external pressures or impaired judgment. The Neoclassical approach
thus maintained the importance of legal deterrence and proportional punishment but
introduced mitigating circumstances in sentencing and legal responsibility.9

One of the key contributions of the Neoclassical School was the introduction
of individual discretion in the justice system. Unlike the rigid punishment model of
Classical Theory, which treated all offenders equally regardless of personal
circumstances, the Neoclassical Theory recognized that children, mentally ill
individuals, and first-time offenders should be treated differently from habitual
criminals. This led to reforms such as separate juvenile justice systems, insanity
defences, and judicial discretion in sentencing. Courts began to consider motive,
intent, and mental state when determining guilt and appropriate punishment, making
the legal system more flexible and humane.10Another significant development of the
Neoclassical Theory was the shift from extreme punishment to rehabilitative justice.
While it still supported deterrence as a crime prevention strategy, it acknowledged
that some offenders need rehabilitation rather than severe punishment. This
influenced modern correctional policies, parole systems, and probation programs,
which aim to reform offenders rather than merely punishing them. The Neoclassical
School’s emphasis on individual circumstances, fairness, and judicial discretion
remains a fundamental principle in contemporary legal systems worldwide.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF CRIME

The Biological Theories of Crime argue that criminal behaviour is influenced

by genetic, neurological, and physiological factors rather than purely social or
environmental causes. These theories suggest that some individuals may have an

9
Neoclassical School of Criminology, Availale at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-
..............classical_school_%28criminology%29 (last visited March 02, 2025).
10
Supra note 5 at 119.

62
innate predisposition to criminality due to biological and hereditary traits. Early
biological theories focused on physical characteristics and evolutionary factors,
while modern biological research explores genetics, brain chemistry, and
neurophysiological conditions as potential contributors to criminal behaviour. While
early biological theories were flawed, modern advancements in genetics,
neuroscience, and psychology have provided valuable insights into how biological
factors contribute to criminal behaviour. However, crime cannot be explained solely
through biology, and a multidisciplinary approach combining biological,
psychological, and sociological theories is necessary to understand criminality
fully.11

3.4.1. Cesare Lombroso’s Atavistic Theory (1876)

Cesare Lombroso, an Italian physician and criminologist, is regarded as the

father of modern criminology for his pioneering work in the biological explanation
of crime. In his book "L'Uomo Delinquente" (The Criminal Man) (1876), he
introduced the Atavistic Theory of Crime, which argued that criminals are
biologically different from law-abiding individuals and possess physical traits that
resemble primitive human ancestors. He believed that some individuals were "born
criminals", inheriting traits that made them more likely to engage in criminal
behavior.
Lombroso described these individuals as atavistic, meaning they were
evolutionary throwbacks to an earlier stage of human development, possessing
biological defects that made them less evolved and more prone to deviance.12 His
research, based on studying prison inmates, led him to conclude that certain physical
features, such as large jaws, asymmetrical faces, long arms, sloping foreheads, and
high cheekbones, were common among criminals. He classified offenders into
different types, including born criminals (with atavistic traits), criminaloids
(influenced by social factors), occasional criminals (who committed crimes under
specific circumstances), and insane criminals (suffering from mental illness).

11
Supra note 4 at 210.
12
Lombroso Theory of Criminology, Available at : https://lawbhoomi.com/lombroso-theory-
..............of-criminology/ (last visited March 02, 2025).

63
 Although Lombroso initially focused on biological determinism, he later
acknowledged that social and environmental factors also influence criminal
behavior. Despite his contributions to criminology, his theory faced severe criticism
for being scientifically flawed, racially biased, and lacking empirical validity. His
research was based on small, unrepresentative samples, and his conclusions often
reinforced discriminatory stereotypes against ethnic minorities and lower-class
individuals. Furthermore, modern criminology has disproved his idea that physical
appearance determines criminality, emphasizing instead the complex interplay of
genetics, psychology, environment, and social influences in shaping criminal
behavior.13

Despite its shortcomings, Lombroso’s work laid the foundation for positivist
criminology, which shifted the study of crime toward scientific research and
empirical observation. His ideas influenced the development of criminal profiling
and forensic sciences, and his later advocacy for rehabilitation and treatment of
offenders contributed to modern correctional policies. While his Atavistic Theory is
no longer accepted, Lombroso’s role in transforming criminology into a scientific
discipline remains a significant part of its history.

3.4.2 William Sheldon’s Somatotype Theory (1949)

William Sheldon, an American psychologist and physician, introduced the

Somatotype Theory in 1949, which linked body types (somatotypes) to personality
traits and criminal behaviour. He proposed that an individual's physique influences
their temperament and behavioural tendencies, including the likelihood of engaging
in criminal activities. Sheldon categorized people into three primary body types—
endomorphs, mesomorphs, and ectomorphs—each associated with distinct
personality traits. His theory suggested that mesomorphs (muscular and strong
individuals) were more likely to engage in criminal behaviour due to their
aggressive, adventurous, and risk-taking nature.14

13
Supra note 6 at 321.
14
Siegel & Welsh , Criminology : The Core 154 (Cengage Learning, 7th edn., 2023).

64
 Sheldon’s classification included three main somatotypes. Endomorphs (soft,
round, and heavy individuals) were described as sociable, relaxed, and comfort-
seeking, making them the least likely to engage in violent crime but more prone to
offenses like fraud. Ectomorphs (thin, fragile, and introverted individuals) were
characterized as shy, anxious, and intellectual, making them the least likely to
commit crimes. Mesomorphs (muscular, athletic, and energetic individuals) were
considered the most prone to criminal activity, particularly violent crimes, due to
their assertiveness, physical strength, and dominance. Sheldon believed that
biological and psychological factors together influenced criminal tendencies, making
mesomorphic individuals naturally more inclined toward aggression and
lawbreaking behaviour.15

Although Sheldon’s Somatotype Theory was one of the first to explore the
relationship between body type and crime, it has been widely criticized for being
overly simplistic and lacking scientific rigor. His research was based on observations
of juvenile delinquents, but he failed to consider social, environmental, and
psychological influences that contribute to criminal behaviour. Modern
criminologists argue that criminal tendencies cannot be determined solely by
physical appearance, as socialization, economic conditions, and upbringing play a
crucial role in shaping behaviour.16 Despite its flaws, Sheldon’s work influenced
early studies on biological criminology and personality development, paving the way
for further research into the connection between genetics, physiology, and criminal
behaviour.

3.5 PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES OF CRIME

Psychological theories of crime focus on individual mental processes,

personality traits, emotions, cognitive development, and behavioural patterns to
explain why people engage in criminal activities. Unlike biological theories, which
emphasize genetics and physical traits, or sociological theories, which highlight
environmental influences, psychological theories explore the inner workings of the

15
Id. at 158.
16
Id. at 164.

65
human mind, including thoughts, motivations, and personality disorders that
contribute to criminal behaviour. These theories suggest that certain psychological
conditions, maladaptive thinking patterns, and emotional disturbances can increase
the likelihood of criminal activity.17

3.5.1 Sigmund Freud’s Psychoanalytic Theory

Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, proposed that human

behaviour, including criminal behaviour, is driven by unconscious psychological
forces formed during childhood. His Psychoanalytic Theory suggests that the human
mind consists of three components—the id, ego, and superego—which influence
decision-making and behavioural tendencies. According to Freud, crime occurs
when there is an imbalance among these components, particularly when the id
dominates over the ego and superego, leading to impulsive and antisocial behaviour.
His theory also highlights the role of early childhood experiences, repressed
emotions, and unresolved conflicts in shaping criminal tendencies.18

Freud described the id as the primitive, instinctual part of the mind that seeks
immediate pleasure and gratification. The ego, on the other hand, acts as the rational
decision-maker, balancing the desires of the id with the realities of life. The superego
represents moral and ethical standards, internalized from parents, society, and
culture. When the superego is weak or underdeveloped, individuals may lack guilt
or remorse, making them more prone to criminal activities. Conversely, if the
superego is overly strict, it may lead to extreme guilt and psychological distress,
which could manifest in deviant behaviour as a coping mechanism.

Freud also linked criminality to repressed childhood trauma and unresolved

conflicts, arguing that individuals who experience abuse, neglect, or inconsistent
discipline may develop unconscious hostility or aggression, which later expresses
itself through criminal acts. He believed that some crimes might be symbolic

17
Supra note 1 at 256.
18
Psychodynamic Theory of Criminal Behaviour, Available at :
………...https://thelegalquotient.com/criminal-laws/criminology/psychodynamic-theory-of-criminal
behaviour/2695/ (last visited on March 08, 2025).

66
expressions of repressed desires or inner conflicts, where offenders unconsciously
act out emotions they have failed to process.19

While Freud’s theory has been influential in forensic psychology and

criminal profiling, it has been criticized for being highly theoretical and lacking
empirical evidence. Modern criminologists argue that crime cannot be explained
solely through unconscious motivations, as social, economic, and environmental
factors also play a crucial role. However, Freud’s ideas have contributed significantly
to the understanding of mental health disorders, personality development, and
rehabilitation strategies, influencing therapeutic approaches for offenders, especially
those with deep-seated emotional and psychological issues.20

3.5.2 Hans Eysenck’s Personality Theory

Hans Eysenck, a British psychologist, proposed the Personality Theory of

Crime, which suggests that criminal behaviour is linked to personality traits that are
biologically and genetically influenced. According to Eysenck, some individuals are
naturally more prone to criminality due to their personality structure, which affects
how they respond to punishment, socialization, and environmental influences. His
theory combines biological, psychological, and social factors, making it one of the
earliest biosocial explanations of crime.

Eysenck identified three major personality dimensions that determine an

individual’s likelihood of engaging in criminal behaviour: Extraversion (E),
Neuroticism (N), and Psychoticism (P).21

• Extraversion (E): Extraverts are sociable, energetic, impulsive, and

sensation-seeking. They require high levels of stimulation and are less
sensitive to punishment, making them more likely to engage in risk-taking

19
Sigmund Freud Theory, Available at : https://ledroitindia.in/sigmund-freud-theory/ (last
………...visited on March 09, 2025).
20
Faculty Scholarship , Available at : https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship/120/
(last visited on March 10, 2025).
21
Hollin, Clive R., Psychology and Crime: An Introduction to Criminological Psychology 112
………..(Routledge, 2nd edn., 2023).

67
 behaviours, including crime. In contrast, introverts are more reserved and
cautious, making them less likely to break laws.
• Neuroticism (N): Individuals with high neuroticism are emotionally
unstable, anxious, and prone to stress and aggression. They react strongly to
negative situations and may resort to crime as a way of coping with
frustration or anxiety. People with low neuroticism are more emotionally
stable and less likely to be influenced by stressful circumstances.
• Psychoticism (P): Psychotic individuals are cold, aggressive, antisocial, and
lack empathy. High psychoticism is strongly linked to violent and criminal
behaviour, as such individuals tend to be impulsive, insensitive, and difficult
to socialize.22

Eysenck argued that criminals typically score high on Extraversion,

Neuroticism, and Psychoticism, making them more impulsive, emotionally unstable,
and resistant to societal norms. He also believed that these personality traits have a
biological basis, influenced by genetic inheritance and differences in brain function.
For example, extraverts are thought to have underactive nervous systems, which
makes them seek excitement and stimulation, leading to risk-taking and thrill-
seeking behaviours.23

A key aspect of Eysenck’s theory is conditioning and socialization. He

suggested that people with high extraversion and neuroticism are less responsive to
conditioning, meaning they do not learn social rules and moral values as effectively
as others. Since punishment and negative reinforcement are less effective for these
individuals, they are more likely to engage in deviant behaviour despite social
consequences.

While Eysenck’s theory has been influential in criminology and forensic

psychology, it has been criticized for oversimplifying personality traits and ignoring
social and environmental factors. Critics argue that crime is influenced by multiple
factors, including economic conditions, peer influence, and upbringing, which

22
Id. at 113.
23
Ibid.

68
Eysenck’s theory does not fully address. However, his work laid the foundation for
modern personality-based approaches to crime prevention, risk assessment, and
offender profiling, making it a significant contribution to the study of criminal
behaviour.24

3.6 SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF CRIME

Sociological theories of crime focus on how social structures, cultural norms,

economic conditions, and group interactions influence criminal behaviour. Unlike
biological and psychological theories, which emphasize individual traits,
sociological theories view crime as a product of social forces, such as poverty,
inequality, peer influence, family background, and lack of social control. These
theories argue that crime is not just a result of individual choices but is shaped by
society’s structure, institutions, and interactions. Sociological theories have greatly
influenced crime prevention policies and criminal justice reforms, leading to
strategies such as community policing, social welfare programs, and rehabilitation
over punishment.25 However, critics argue that these theories do not fully explain
why some individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds do not commit crimes, and
they sometimes overlook personal responsibility and psychological factors. Despite
these limitations, sociological theories remain essential in understanding crime
trends, designing social policies, and addressing the root causes of criminal
behaviours in society.

3.6.1 Robert K. Merton’s Strain Theory

Robert K. Merton’s Strain Theory (1938) is one of the most influential

sociological explanations of crime, arguing that criminal behavior results from a
disconnect between socially approved goals and the available means to achieve them.
Merton believed that societies, particularly capitalist ones, emphasize success,
wealth, and material achievement as primary goals. However, not all individuals
have equal access to legitimate means (such as education, employment, and financial

24
Supra note 21 at 121.
25
Sociological Theories of Crime , Available at : https://www.britannica.com/science/
………../criminology/Sociological-theories (last visited on Mar. 12, 2025).

69
stability) to achieve these goals. When individuals experience strain or frustration
due to this gap, they may resort to crime as an alternative means to achieve success.26

Merton adapted Émile Durkheim’s concept of anomie (a state of

normlessness) to explain how social structures create pressures that lead to criminal
behavior. He identified five modes of individual adaptation to societal goals:

• Conformity – Individuals accept societal goals and use legitimate means to

achieve them (e.g., working hard to earn success).
• Innovation – Individuals accept societal goals but use illegal or
unconventional means to achieve them (e.g., drug dealing, fraud, white-collar
crime).
• Ritualism – Individuals reject societal goals but strictly follow rules and
routines, even when they no longer serve a purpose (e.g., a bureaucrat who
follows regulations but does not aspire for success).
• Retreatism – Individuals reject both societal goals and means, leading to
withdrawal from society (e.g., drug addicts, homeless individuals, or chronic
alcoholics).27
• Rebellion – Individuals reject existing societal goals and means and seek to
replace them with new values and systems (e.g., revolutionary groups or
political extremists).

Merton’s Strain Theory helps explain crimes such as theft, fraud, drug
trafficking, and gang-related violence, where individuals seek financial success
through illegal means when legitimate opportunities are blocked. It also provides
insight into white-collar crime, where corporate executives engage in fraud and
corruption to achieve financial success. However, the theory has been criticized for
focusing too much on economic goals while ignoring non-financial motivations for
crime (such as power, revenge, or psychological factors). Additionally, it does not
explain why some individuals facing strain do not turn to crime. Despite these

26
Sociological Theories of Crime, Available at : https://docmckee.com/cj/criminal-justice-an-
..............overview-of-the-system/section-7-sociological-theories-of-crime/ (last visited on March 11,
2025).
27
Robert K. Merton, Social Structure and Anomie 210 (Routledge, 2nd edn., 2023).

70
criticisms, Strain Theory remains a foundational perspective in criminology,
influencing policies aimed at reducing economic inequality, improving educational
access, and creating social programs to prevent crime.28

3.6.2 The Social Disorganization Theory

The Social Disorganization Theory, developed by Clifford Shaw and Henry

McKay in the 1920s and 1930s, explains crime as a result of breakdowns in social
institutions and community structures. This theory suggests that neighbourhoods
with weak social ties, economic instability, and lack of social control experience
higher crime rates. Unlike theories that focus on individual traits or motivations,
Shaw and McKay argued that crime is a product of environmental conditions rather
than personal characteristics.29

Their research, conducted in Chicago, analysed crime patterns across

different neighbourhood’s. They found that crime rates were highest in areas with
high poverty, population turnover, and ethnic diversity—especially in inner-city
zones known as "zones of transition." These areas were characterized by poor
housing, unemployment, and a lack of community cohesion, which made it difficult
for residents to organize against crime. They observed that crime persisted in these
neighbourhoods over generations, even as different groups of people moved in and
out, proving that it was the environment—not the individuals—that contributed to
criminal behaviour.

According to Social Disorganization Theory, three main factors contribute to

high crime rates in disorganized communities:

• Poverty – Limited financial resources reduce opportunities for legal

employment and social mobility.

28
Supra note 27 at 212.
29
Social Disorganization – Shaw & McKay, Available at : https://soztheo.de/theories-of-
..............crime/social-disorganization/soziale-desorganisation-shaw-mckay/?lang=en (Last visited
March 11, 2025).

71
 • Residential Mobility – Frequent movement of people in and out of the area
prevents the development of strong community ties.
• Ethnic and Cultural Diversity – Differences in language, customs, and
traditions create communication barriers, making it harder to form collective
efforts to reduce crime.30

Shaw and McKay argued that in stable communities, strong family structures,
schools, and religious institutions help regulate behaviour and reinforce social
norms. However, in disorganized neighbourhoods, these institutions fail to function
properly, leading to weakened social control and an increase in criminal activities.
The Social Disorganization Theory has been widely applied in urban crime studies
and has influenced community-based crime prevention programs, such as
neighbourhoods watch initiatives, youth mentorship programs, and urban renewal
projects. 31

However, the theory has been criticized for failing to explain why some
individuals in disadvantaged neighbourhoods do not turn to crime, and for not
accounting for crimes committed in wealthier areas. Despite these limitations, Shaw
and McKay’s work remains a cornerstone of criminology, emphasizing the
importance of community structures and social cohesion in preventing crime. The
theory also remains relevant in discussions on juvenile delinquency, gang violence,
and the effects of economic disparity on crime rates.

3.6.3 Edwin Sutherland’s Differential Association Theory

Edwin Sutherland’s Differential Association Theory (1939) is one of the most

influential sociological explanations of crime, proposing that criminal behaviour is
learned through social interactions with others. Unlike biological or psychological
theories that attribute crime to individual traits, Sutherland argued that people learn
criminal behaviour just as they learn conventional behaviour—through

30
Social Disorganization Theory, Available at : https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/
………../display/document/obo-9780199756384/obo-9780199756384-0192.xml (last visited March
12, 2025).
31
Id. at 73.

72
communication, association, and observation. This theory suggests that crime is not
an inherited or instinctive act but a product of social influence and cultural
transmission.32

According to Differential Association Theory, criminal behaviour is learned

through interaction with close personal groups, such as family, peers, and community
members. Sutherland identified nine key principles of the theory, the most important
of which state that:
• Criminal behaviour is learned, not inherited. No one is born a criminal;
individuals acquire criminal tendencies through socialization.
• Crime is learned through interaction and communication with others,
especially those in close personal groups.
• Learning criminal behaviour involves techniques, motivations, and
justifications for crime. Criminals learn how to commit crimes and why they
should justify their actions.
• When individuals are exposed to more definitions favourable to crime than
definitions unfavourable to crime, they are more likely to engage in criminal
behaviour. This means that if a person is surrounded by people who view
crime as acceptable, they are more likely to adopt those beliefs.33
• Differential associations vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity.
The more time a person spends with criminal influences, and the stronger the
emotional connection, the more likely they are to adopt criminal behaviour.

Sutherland’s theory helps explain why crime often runs in families and
communities, why people in gangs and delinquent peer groups engage in criminal
activity, and how corporate crime is learned within business organizations. His work
shifted criminological focus from biological and psychological explanations to social
and environmental influences, shaping policies that emphasize education,
mentorship, and positive peer associations to prevent crime.34 However, the

32
Edwin H. Sutherland, Donald R. Cressey & David F. Luckenbill, Principles of Criminology
75 (AltaMira Press, 11th edn., 2023).
33
Id. at 82.
34
Differential Association Theory – Sutherland, Available at : https://soztheo.de/theories-of-
..............crime/learning-subculture/differential-association-theory-sutherland/?lang=en (last visited

73
Differential Association Theory has been criticized for not explaining why some
individuals exposed to criminal influences do not turn to crime, and for not
considering individual differences in personality and decision-making. Despite these
criticisms, it remains a cornerstone of modern criminology, particularly in
understanding juvenile delinquency, organized crime, and white-collar crime.

3.6.4 Howard Becker’s Labelling Theory

Howard Becker’s Labelling Theory (1963) argues that crime and deviance
are not inherent in an act but are instead defined by society’s reaction to them. This
means that an act becomes criminal or deviant only when people in power label it as
such. Becker emphasized that the process of labelling individuals as "criminals" or
"deviants" plays a crucial role in shaping their identity and future behaviour. Once
labelled, individuals may internalize this identity, leading to self-fulfilling prophecy
and continued criminal behaviour.35

Becker distinguished between primary deviance and secondary deviance.

Primary deviance refers to minor rule-breaking that does not affect a person’s self-
identity (e.g., a teenager shoplifting once). However, if society labels the individual
as a "thief" and treats them as a criminal, they may adopt this identity and engage in
further secondary deviance, leading to more serious and habitual crime. This process
is known as "deviance amplification", where societal reactions push individuals
deeper into criminal behaviour.36
A key concept in Labelling Theory is "moral entrepreneurship", where people
in positions of power (such as lawmakers, police, or media) define what is considered
criminal or deviant. For example, laws regarding drug use, homosexuality, or even
political dissent have changed over time, showing that crime is a socially constructed
concept rather than an objective reality. The theory has significant implications for
criminal justice policies, advocating for rehabilitation rather than harsh punishment
to avoid labelling individuals as criminals. It has been particularly influential in

On March 13, 2025).

35
Howard S. Becker , Outsiders : Studies in the Sociology of Deviance 45 (Free Press, Revised
edn., 2018).
36
Supra note 35 at 48.

74
understanding juvenile delinquency, recidivism, and the effects of incarceration on
marginalized communities. However, critics argue that Labelling Theory focuses too
much on societal reaction while ignoring the actual causes of criminal behaviour,
such as poverty, psychological factors, or individual choices. Despite these
criticisms, it remains a powerful framework for analysing how the justice system and
societal perceptions shape criminal identities.37

3.7 ECONOMIC THEORIES OF CRIME

Economic theories of crime focus on how financial incentives, economic

conditions, and cost-benefit analysis influence criminal behaviour. Unlike
psychological or sociological theories that emphasize personal traits or social
structures, economic theories view crime as a rational decision-making process,
where individuals weigh the potential benefits of crime against the risks of
punishment. These theories argue that poverty, unemployment, income inequality,
and financial motivation play a crucial role in shaping criminal behaviour. While
economic theories provide a logical framework for understanding crime, critics argue
that they oversimplify human behaviour and ignore psychological, social, and moral
factors that influence crime.

Not all criminals act rationally, and not all poor individuals resort to crime,
which suggests that economic factors alone cannot fully explain criminal behaviour.
However, economic theories remain highly relevant in policy-making, crime
prevention strategies, and understanding financial crimes, making them a crucial part
of modern criminology.38

3.7.1 Gary Becker’s Rational Choice Theory

Gary Becker’s Rational Choice Theory (1968) is an economic theory of crime

that suggests individuals engage in criminal activities after a rational cost-benefit

37
Howard Becker’s Labelling Theory Essay, Available at : https://aithor.co.in/essay-
..............examples/howard-beckers-labelling-theory-essay (last visited on March 13, 2025).
38
Faculty Scholarship, Boston University School of Law , Available at :
………...https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1604&context=faculty_scholars
-hip (last visited on March 12, 2025).

75
analysis. Becker, an economist, applied economic principles to crime, arguing that
criminals make calculated decisions based on potential rewards, risks, and
punishments. Unlike psychological or sociological theories, which emphasize social
influences, emotions, or mental disorders, Rational Choice Theory treats crime as a
deliberate and strategic act, where offenders weigh the prospects of success against
the likelihood of punishment.39

According to this theory, an individual will commit a crime if:

• The expected benefits (financial gain, social status, power, or pleasure)

outweigh the potential costs (arrest, imprisonment, fines, or social stigma).
• The risk of getting caught is low, and law enforcement is perceived as
ineffective.
• The severity of punishment is minimal compared to the benefits gained from
the crime.

For example, a person may decide to commit fraud or theft if they believe
they can avoid detection and gain significant profit, whereas a stricter legal system
with high conviction rates may discourage them from taking that risk. Becker’s
model is often used to justify stronger deterrence policies, such as harsher
punishments, higher policing levels, and increased surveillance, to raise the costs of
crime and discourage criminal activities.

However, Rational Choice Theory has limitations. Critics argue that not all
crimes are rational, as many offenses, such as crimes of passion, impulsive acts, and
mental illness-related offenses, are committed without logical calculation.
Additionally, social and psychological factors, such as poverty, peer pressure,
addiction, and emotional distress, also influence criminal behaviour, which the
theory largely ignores.40

39
Rational Choice as a Theory of Crime, Lauderdale Criminal Defense, Available at :
………...https://www.lauderdalecriminaldefense.com/rational-choice-as-a-theory-of-crime/ (last
visited March on 14, 2025).
40
Gary S. Becker, Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach 245 (University of Chicago
Press, 2nd edn., 2023).

76
 Despite these criticisms, Rational Choice Theory remains influential in
shaping modern crime prevention strategies, including zero-tolerance policies,
increased policing, and strict legal penalties. It has also been widely applied in
understanding white-collar crimes, organized crime, and cybercrime, where
offenders often carefully plan their actions to maximize profit while minimizing legal
risks.

3.7.2 Marxist Theory (Conflict Theory) – Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels

The Marxist Theory of Crime, also known as Conflict Theory, was developed
by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels as part of their broader critique of capitalist
societies. This theory argues that crime is a result of class struggle, economic
inequality, and power imbalances, where laws are designed to protect the interests
of the ruling elite (bourgeoisie) while oppressing the working class (proletariat).
Unlike theories that focus on individual choices or biological traits, Marxist
criminology views crime as a product of the economic system, where the wealthy
use the law and criminal justice system as tools of control to maintain their
dominance.41

According to Marxist criminologists, capitalist societies create social and

economic conditions that encourage crime, especially among the working class, who
may resort to theft, fraud, or violent crimes due to poverty, unemployment, and lack
of resources. At the same time, crimes committed by the ruling class, such as
corporate fraud, tax evasion, and corruption, often go unpunished or receive lighter
sentences, highlighting the bias of the legal system. The criminal justice system is
thus not neutral but serves the interests of the wealthy, punishing street crimes
harshly while allowing white-collar crimes to thrive.42

Marxist criminology also emphasizes the concept of state crime and

repression, where governments use police forces, courts, and prisons to suppress
dissent, labour movements, and political opposition. For example, protests and

41
Steven Spitzer & Richard Quinney , Criminology : Critical Marxist Perspectives 187
(Routledge, 3rd edn., 2023).
42
Id. at 192.

77
strikes organized by workers may be criminalized, while financial crimes committed
by large corporations are overlooked or lightly punished. This perspective explains
why laws are often selectively enforced, targeting marginalized communities while
protecting those in power.

One of the key contributions of Marxist criminology is its focus on structural

inequalities as a root cause of crime, advocating for economic reforms, social justice
policies, and redistribution of wealth to reduce criminal behaviour. However, critics
argue that the theory oversimplifies crime, failing to account for personal
responsibility, psychological factors, and crimes committed within socialist or
communist systems. Despite these criticisms, Marxist criminology remains highly
influential in explaining economic crimes, corporate corruption, and the role of
power dynamics in shaping the justice system, making it a vital perspective in
modern criminology.43

3.8 CONTEMPORARY THEORIES OF CRIME

Contemporary theories of crime build upon classical, biological,

psychological, and sociological perspectives while incorporating modern
developments such as globalization, technological advancements, digital crime, and
evolving social structures. Unlike earlier theories that focused on individual traits or
traditional social factors, contemporary criminology examines how crime is
influenced by technology, economic policies, environmental changes, and global
interconnectedness. These theories aim to explain modern crime trends, including
cybercrime, terrorism, corporate crime, organized crime, and crimes related to social
and economic inequalities. Contemporary criminology also explores the impact of
economic policies and global capitalism on crime, emphasizing how corporate
misconduct, environmental crimes, and transnational organized crime have
increased due to deregulation and weak international enforcement. Critics argue that
while contemporary theories provide valuable insights into modern crime patterns,
they often lack empirical validation and struggle to account for traditional violent

43
Id. at 199.

78
 44
crimes. Despite this, contemporary criminological theories remain essential in
shaping modern law enforcement strategies, policymaking, and crime prevention
initiatives in an increasingly globalized and digital world.

3.8.1 Cybercrime Theory

Cybercrime Theory is a contemporary criminological perspective that

examines how technology, digital networks, and the internet facilitate new forms of
criminal behaviour. Unlike traditional crimes that occur in physical spaces,
cybercrime operates in virtual environments, making it more complex, anonymous,
and difficult to regulate. Cybercriminals exploit technological vulnerabilities, social
engineering tactics, and global connectivity to commit crimes such as hacking,
45
identity theft, online fraud, cyberstalking, and digital piracy. The rise of
cryptocurrencies, artificial intelligence, and the dark web has further expanded the
scope of cybercrime, enabling financial fraud, cyberterrorism, and organized
cybercriminal networks.

Several criminological theories have been adapted to explain cybercrime.

Routine Activity Theory (Cohen & Felson, 1979) suggests that cybercrime occurs
when a motivated offender, a suitable target, and a lack of capable guardians
converge in cyberspace. For example, an unsecured online banking system (suitable
target) combined with a skilled hacker (motivated offender) and weak cybersecurity
measures (lack of guardianship) creates an opportunity for cyber theft. Social
Learning Theory (Sutherland, 1939) argues that individuals learn cybercriminal
behaviour through online communities, hacker forums, and digital subcultures that
normalize activities like hacking or digital fraud.46

Cybercrime Theory also incorporates elements of Rational Choice Theory,

proposing that cybercriminals engage in online offenses after weighing the risks and

44
John E. Conklin, Criminology 275 (Pearson, 12th edn., 2023).
45
Id. at 289.
46
Majid Yar, The Novelty of 'Cybercrime': An Assessment in Light of Routine Activity Theory,
Available at : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238433587_The_Novelty_of_% 27
Cybercrime%27An_Assessment_in_Light_of_Routine_Activity_Theory (last visited on
March 12, 2025).

79
rewards. Unlike street crimes, cybercrime is often seen as low-risk, high-reward, as
offenders can remain anonymous, operate across borders, and evade law
enforcement more easily. Additionally, Neutralization Theory (Sykes & Matza,
1957) explains how cybercriminals justify their actions by minimizing harm (e.g.,
"piracy doesn’t hurt anyone"), blaming victims (e.g., "they should have secured their
accounts"), or appealing to higher loyalties (e.g., hacking for political activism or
ethical reasons).

The increasing reliance on digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and

interconnected systems has made cybercrime one of the most pressing issues in
modern criminology. Governments and law enforcement agencies worldwide
struggle to develop effective cybersecurity policies, legal frameworks, and
international cooperation to combat cyber offenses. Critics argue that cybercrime
theories still lack comprehensive empirical studies due to the rapid evolution of
digital crime tactics. However, ongoing research in cybercriminal, forensic
computing, and digital risk management continues to shape modern crime prevention
strategies, making cybercrime theory a crucial aspect of contemporary criminology.

3.8.2 Routine Activity Theory – Cohen & Felson

Routine Activity Theory (RAT) was developed by Lawrence Cohen and

Marcus Felson in 1979 as a framework to explain how crime occurs in everyday life
47
based on routine activities and environmental factors. It suggests that criminal
behaviour is influenced by situational factors and occurs when three elements
converge:

• A Motivated Offender – An individual willing to commit a crime (e.g., a

thief looking for an easy target).
• A Suitable Target – A vulnerable person or object that attracts the offender
(e.g., an unattended laptop, an unlocked car, or a person walking alone at
night).

47
Supra note 1 at 211.

80
 • The Absence of a Capable Guardian – Lack of protection that could deter
crime (e.g., no security cameras, weak cybersecurity, or absence of law
enforcement).

Cohen and Felson argued that changes in routine activities—such as work

schedules, travel patterns, and technological advancements—create opportunities for
crime. For example, increased urbanization, online transactions, and global
connectivity have expanded the range of potential targets, leading to the rise of
cybercrime, fraud, and identity theft. Similarly, neighbourhoods with low social
cohesion, poor surveillance, or high population turnover are more vulnerable to theft,
burglary, and street crimes due to the lack of capable guardians.48

Routine Activity Theory has been widely applied in crime prevention

strategies, leading to policies such as target-hardening (e.g., stronger locks, security
alarms), increased surveillance (CCTV cameras, neighbourhood watch programs),
and improved guardianship (police presence, cybersecurity measures). However,
critics argue that the theory does not explain why individuals become motivated
offenders and tends to focus too much on crime prevention rather than addressing
social and economic root causes. Despite this, Routine Activity Theory remains one
of the most influential criminological frameworks, particularly in situational crime
prevention, urban safety planning, and cybersecurity strategies.

3.8.3 Feminist Criminology

Feminist Criminology emerged as a response to traditional criminological

theories that largely ignored the role of gender in crime. Historically, most
criminological theories were developed by male scholars and focused primarily on
male offenders, failing to consider the unique experiences of women in both criminal
activity and victimization. Feminist criminology argues that gender inequality,
patriarchy, and social structures shape both criminal behaviour and the justice
system’s response to crime. It seeks to understand why women commit fewer crimes

48
Supra note 3 at 192.

81
than men, how gender roles influence criminality, and how the legal system treats
female offenders and victims differently.49

One of the key arguments of feminist criminology is that crime cannot be

studied in isolation from social power dynamics, particularly those related to gender,
race, and class. Many feminist criminologists highlight how women’s pathways to
crime differ from men’s, often influenced by economic dependence, victimization
(such as domestic violence and sexual abuse), and societal expectations of
femininity. For example, research shows that many female offenders have a history
of abuse, poverty, or coercion, leading to crimes such as prostitution, drug-related
offenses, or theft for survival.50

Feminist criminologists also focus on gendered victimization, emphasizing

how violence against women, sexual harassment, and human trafficking are often
underreported, dismissed, or inadequately addressed by the justice system. They
argue that laws and policies have historically been male-cantered, failing to protect
women from crimes such as marital rape, domestic violence, and workplace
harassment. This has led to legal reforms, including stronger laws against gender-
based violence, the establishment of women’s crisis centres, and changes in policing
and sentencing practices to be more responsive to women’s experiences.51

Several branches of feminist criminology offer different perspectives. Liberal

feminist criminology argues for equal treatment of men and women within the justice
system, while radical feminist criminology sees patriarchy as the root cause of
female oppression and crime. Marxist and socialist feminist criminology emphasize
how capitalism and economic inequality contribute to women’s victimization and
criminalization. Intersectional feminism highlights how race, class, and sexuality
intersect with gender to create unique experiences of crime and injustice for women
from marginalized backgrounds.

49
Meda Chesney - Lind & Lisa Pasko , The Female Offender : Girls, Women, and Crime 142
(SAGE Publications, 3rd edn., 2023).
50
Id. at 152.
51
Available at :https://library.fiveable.me/deviance-social-control/unit-6/feminist-criminology
/study-guide/GpXWKr7lzUv4bHgm.(last visited on March 22,2025).

82
 While feminist criminology has significantly influenced legal and social
reforms, critics argue that it sometimes overemphasizes gender differences while
neglecting biological, psychological, and economic explanations of crime. However,
it remains an essential field in understanding gendered dimensions of crime,
advocating for justice reform, and shaping policies to address issues such as domestic
violence, sexual exploitation, and female criminality.

3.10 CONCLUSION

Crime in India is shaped by a unique blend of historical, social, economic,

and cultural factors, making it essential to adapt global criminological theories to the
Indian context. While sociological theories explain crime rooted in poverty, caste,
and community structures, economic theories shed light on corporate crimes and
corruption, and psychological theories help understand individual criminal
tendencies. Contemporary challenges such as cybercrime, gender-based violence,
and transnational organized crime require new criminological approaches,
integrating law enforcement, policy reforms, and social development programs.
Understanding crime in the Indian perspective is essential for effective law
enforcement, judicial fairness, and long-term crime prevention strategies.

83