Fines as Punishment: A License for the Rich or Prison for the Poor?

Recently I watched a comedy film wherein the hero who happened to be the son of a rich builder of the city, had blocked a busy road with a massive iron statue of his girlfriend to impress her, but little did he know, that his act of love for someone tantamount to act of nuisance for the rest of the public. But what do you think? What legal consequences he must have borne for his act? Mind you, he was not a minor, but a 24-year-old, grown up man! All he had to face was a fine of Rs. 5,000.

| Fines as Punishment: A License for the Rich or Prison for the Poor? |

However, it wasn't just a scene from a movie, it happens in real life too. There are several such cases such as rash driving, negligent conduct with animals, and causing damage in public ways etc. where the court has the discretion to impose fine or imprisonment not exceeding period of 6 months. However, generally for the first time offenders the court imposes only fine and even if they are repeated offenders the courts leave them just by imposing a monetary penalty given that the power of position and money enjoyed by them. Such people have access to purchase a license to break the law. Then why is such legal framework there for? Whom is it protecting? Sometimes judicial discretion becomes a loophole for the privileged as evident from many hit and run cases where the offender easily buys justice by paying fine.

Imagine imposing the same amount of fine on a billionaire and a rickshaw puller! By doing so the law systematically favors the wealthy and punishes the destitute. The Indian society does not only need equal treatment but equal outcomes as well. Therefore, in my opinion fine as a punishment even for petty offences is a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. It also suggests that how the legal system prioritizes procedural fairness over equitable outcomes.

In India, there are people of different standards, from extremely well off to hardly being able to earn a bread. In such situation, is it fair to have fine a punishment? The purpose of punishment is to deter the offender from committing such act again. But it will only serve its purpose when it will have an impact on the offender. Those who have enough money stay unaffected by such punishments whereas those who can’t afford it has to suffer. Then how is fine serves the purpose of punishment and how can this be based on equality?

Replacing fine with a mandatory community service as a punishment which will be more effective, equitable and also serve the purpose of punishment while reinforcing the reformative theory. It will have a positive impact on the offender and will benefit the society as well.

Imagine a reckless driver cleaning roads and assisting the traffic police for a month. Such type of punishment will connect the offender with the society, made them realize their mistake and foster empathy and improvement. Under the new criminal law i.e. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, community service has been introduced and if it will be implemented effectively then the outcomes will definitely be positive.

Apart from this there is one more way to have an equal punishment. What about an “income – adjusted fine” which means that the amount of fine will be adjusted according to income level of the offender leading to at least equal punishment! This type of punishment imposing method is followed in Finland and Germany. However, the idea adjusted fine does not serve the purpose of punishment because irrespective of the amount of fine the richer will stay unbothered and unaffected by this so it’s more impactful to have community service as punishment in my opinion.

What do you all think? Do let me know in the comment below.

Manshi Kumari is a second-year law student at the School of Law, UPES, with a keen interest in constitutional law, legal research, and public policy. Her commitment to learning and contributing to the legal community makes her a promising voice among emerging legal minds.