Scrutinizing the Need for Sentencing Guidelines

Abstract

It is a general assumption that when a prisoner has an opportunity to appeal, the final most substantial step of the Criminal Justice system is simply sentencing. It provides a psychological impact of closure of having adequately done justice. However, the fact that the calculation of sufficient penalty in our country is based solely on such ambiguous factors, such as aggravating or extenuating situations or on their gravity, does not serve the intent of the Criminal Justice system's administration. It is called ambiguous because for one judge, what aggravates or extenuates need not/will not be the same for the other. In order to address this obstacle, few Committee Studies have recommended the creation of formal guidelines. The whole concept behind this paper is to point out the existing method of deciding effective punishment and to point out the need, with the aid of legal precedents and Committee Findings, for formal sentencing guidelines. The consequence of the analysis is that the judiciary must bring forth a straightforward set of rules on sentencing laws in order to prevent this discrepancy in sentencing; and "imprisonment for life without commutation or remission" must be g for particular crimes that do not warrant a death penalty but a comparatively stronger penalty.