Criminology · April 4, 2026
In the context of law and criminology, the only word that cannot be confined within a precise definition is “crime.” The reason is that its meanings are often determined with reference to law, and law itself is not a static thing. Every society has its own morality and its own law, which may differ from the morality and law of another society.
In Eastern societies, taking labor from children is considered permissible, but in Western societies, employing children under the age of eighteen is a crime. Similarly, in Eastern societies, physical punishment by parents for the purpose of disciplining children is not considered a crime, whereas in Western societies, such an act falls under crimes. In Eastern societies, men are allowed to have four marriages, but in Western societies, this is a crime. Public displays of affection (kissing and hugging) are not considered crimes in Western societies. If, at the time of departure, a husband does not kiss his wife, she may approach the court for divorce. The same act, if done in an Eastern country, is considered punishable in the eyes of morality and law.
Society continues to change. The societies from a hundred years ago has changed to such an extent that people of that time would view present-day societies as an entirely different country from a social perspective. In the nineteenth century, the British conquered many countries, and societies there began to change rapidly. For example, in subcontinent, previously, in every case, there used to be a plaintiff and an accused, and with the help of a judge, their matters would be resolved.
Now the situation has changed. In every criminal case, the state itself is the complainant. The status of the private complainant has been reduced merely to that of a witness. Every criminal offense is considered a crime against the state or government. Therefore, at the time of summoning in court, the court official announces the case in these words: “The State versus so-and-so.” This is not merely a call; rather, it represents a profound change. Legal experts and lawmakers have not yet fully examined its implications.
After the creation of Pakistan of and India, changes occurred here, and criticism of British laws began. So many minor changes were made in those laws that the present law is no longer the same as it originally was. It has become a means of taking revenge against opponents. Under continuous martial laws, the criminal law has been completely distorted, and it appears as if we are living in the medieval ages. At present, three systems of penal law are in force in Pakistan: first, the Pakistan Penal Code as a legacy of the British; second, the laws introduced under martial law; and third, the Islamic laws established under Sharia.
Definition of Crime
Another reason why crime cannot be precisely defined is that, like society, the law itself keeps changing. Once again, referring to the West, we observe that acts related to sexuality which were punishable some years ago are no longer considered punishable today. Abortion is still a crime in our society, but in view of increasing population, Western societies have accepted it out of necessity, and it is no longer regarded as a crime there.
For example, in the early period of Pakistan, there was no restriction on drinking alcohol, and it was not considered a crime. Later, a ban was imposed on alcohol consumption, and today the sale and possession of alcohol are considered crimes. The same is the case with hashish, opium, and other narcotics.
In every society, killing a human being is considered a heinous crime, but in a state of war, a human killing another human is regarded as bravery. Similarly, in the West, killing in a duel (Duel) used to be considered permissible and was not regarded as a crime. Killing someone while in a state of intoxication is not equivalent to intentional murder and such a criminal does not receive the same punishment as is given to a person guilty of intentional murder.
Sin and Crime
Attempts have also been made to find a relationship between sin and crime, as a result of which a considerable amount of organized, though not very substantial, material has been produced on this subject. This is an important aspect of the study of crime, but its nature is more historical than academic. In comparison to worldly legislation, the system of morality and its teachings have evolved on a different and much longer timescale.
It has already been explained above that it is easy to trace the change of an act from being a crime to not being a crime. An act that is a crime today may not remain a crime tomorrow due to a change in law. In the West, homosexual relations were once considered a crime, but due to changes in the law, they are no longer included under crimes. Such changes can be explained. However, we cannot establish any correspondence between these short-term changes and the long-term evolution and transformations of religion and morality. Interest in this subject is limited only to philosophers and those associated with teaching and academia.
Crime as a Disease
As we shall see later, in the nineteenth century and the early twentieth century, crime was considered a disease that affected mentally and physically weak individuals in society, leading them to commit acts that are regarded as crimes in the eyes of the law, and which can be controlled. This theory explains the commission of crime to some extent, but it does not cover legal subtleties such as intention, malice, or motive. From this perspective, no clear relationship between crime and punishment is established, and such determination is very important for legal reasoning.
Crime and Social Organization
If crime is considered as a function or dysfunction of society, then definitions of crime can be formulated that correspond with the ideas and theories of Durkheim, Marx, the Chicago School, Sutherland, and their followers. However, all these are vague definitions of the phenomenon of crime. Is crime such violation of law for which punishment is necessary? Is it a deliberate attempt to undermine the accepted social and political norms of society? Is it a method through which some individuals or classes can be deprived of or excluded from social activities? Such definitions cannot express the relationship between crime and punishment. They are useful only to the extent that, like legal experts, they emphasize the importance of punishment. It is these restrictions that make crime visible and define it.
Crime as a Social Process
One of the attempts to resolve the various complex ideas that determine the nature of crime begins with the process of definition itself. For this purpose, crime must once again be assumed to be a disease. A disease is not considered to exist until a complaint is made about it or its symptoms appear. A kidney disease is detected only when there is pain. Therefore, until symptoms appear, the existence of a disease is not established.
The same situation applies to crime. Incidents such as robbery, burglary, or rape do not fall into the category of crime until the victims report them or they come to the knowledge of the relevant authorities through some other means. Although earlier theorists who regarded crime as a social process included all unreported acts or omissions within the scope of crime, yet until the victim himself or someone else reports it, the occurrence of a crime is not considered to have taken place. Such crimes that are not reported or not recorded are called the “dark figure”. Such crimes constitute approximately fifty to ninety percent, or even more, of the crimes that are recorded.
Another criterion for determining the existence of a crime is the registration of a complaint with the relevant authorities. If it is not reported or the police do not record it, it means that the crime has not occurred. A large number of crimes are such that they do not come to the attention of people or the police. Such incidents do not fall into the category of crimes.
Thus, in the concept of crime, there exists a chain of interactions: the reaction of the person who has been subjected to an attack on body or property, and then the reaction of the police, whether a complaint has been registered with them or they have discovered it on their own.
The final stage in determining the existence of a crime is the magistrate or judge, who decides whether the act or omission contains the essential elements of a crime or not. All these definitions are part of that complex structure of social and political organization within which human activities occur, are organized, supervised, and defined. The nature of crime and the complications in its definition will once again be discussed under white-collar crimes.
The positivist school has rejected this definition of crime on the grounds that it is not based on scientific principles. In their view, beneath social relations there exists a natural current which indicates that crime or deviance is unnatural and pathological behavior.
Definitions based on law are neither as narrow nor as inappropriate as they appear. They include punishments and also limit those punishments. Definitions formulated from a moral point of view are based on deep and long-standing popular beliefs, and they give different shades to crime and punishment. Medical and social interpretations and examples greatly assist in defining crimes and consider crime as a part of a social process. It is through this process that crime comes into existence and is identified. For this identification, it is as necessary to know the reaction of the victim and the response of law enforcement agencies as it is to know the actor from whom the act originated upon which the label of crime is affixed.
Despite all this, the understanding of the word “crime” holds a central position in legislation and law-breaking, and punishment is also determined in proportion to the gravity of the crime.
In the view of law and jurisprudence, every act or omission that is liable to punishment is a crime. From this definition of crime, the relationship between crime and punishment is established.
In the view of a legal expert, this very relationship holds a central position in the concept of crime. The author of History of Criminal Law, Sir James Stephen (1829–1894), defined crime in his time in these words: “Crime is an act or omission for which punishment is necessary upon its commission.” From this definition, we can infer that the nature of criminality in an act, omission, or negligence depends upon the punishment which is the necessary consequence of committing the crime. On this basis, while applying punishment, the age of the offender and his mental condition are taken into consideration. For example, if the killer is a minor, or if he is an adult but his mental condition is not sound, then he will not be declared guilty of murder or violence because he cannot have the intention or motive to commit the crime in his mind.
Thus, in the view of legal experts, the three elements of crime are: the prohibited act or omission, intention, crime, and punishment. The arguments and decisions in courts are based on this concept of crime. Therefore, it is inevitable to conclude that crime is an intentional act. Fourteen hundred years ago, Islam had clarified that: “Actions are judged by intentions.” This is as great a truth today as it was at that time. Its universality is self-evident.
In all countries, in its broadest sense, crime consists of an act that violates a law, for which the court imposes a pre-determined and various types of prescribed punishments. These punishments may include death, imprisonment, fine, dismissal from office, and others such as transportation across the sea (Kala Pani) or exile, etc.
For the purpose of classification, crimes are divided into two categories. One is mala in se (malum in se), that is, crimes which are wrong in themselves under all circumstances, and the second category is mala prohibita, which consists of prohibited acts. Murder is a crime that is inherently a crime in itself. It is an example of mala in se and is based on evil. On the other hand, there are acts which society declares prohibited in order to maintain its balance, such as gambling, the use of narcotics, violation of traffic rules, etc. These crimes fall under prohibited acts. One characteristic of such crimes is that they differ in every society and often change within the same society due to changes in public opinion, customs, and religious standards. The same example again is alcohol consumption.
At one time, when it was banned in some countries, alcohol consumption became a crime. But when this prohibition failed, alcohol consumption was removed from the list of crimes. Pakistan has also faced a similar situation. Previously, alcohol consumption was not a crime, but after the imposition of a ban, it was included in the list of crimes. Examples of this type can also be found under the Customs Act. Today, the import of a certain item may be prohibited and counted as a crime, but if tomorrow its import is allowed, then it no longer remains a crime. All such acts fall under mala prohibita.
The French sociologist Émile Durkheim considered crime to be an essential part of society because crimes have existed in all societies since ancient times. No society has ever been completely free of crime. In his view, mala prohibita crimes define the boundaries of acceptable behavior for society and, by testing these boundaries, bring about changes within it. For example, in the West, sexual freedom emerged at a time when many types of sexual behavior were considered crimes. Abortion is such an act which at one time was equivalent to murder, but in the United States it is now included among the fundamental rights of women. In 1973, in the case of Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court of the United States declared it a constitutional right of women.