[Criminal (English) Movie Free Download In Hindi Hd
Everardo Laboy
In English, there are a lot of specific words for different types of crimes and the criminals who commit them. Unfortunately, the list of crimes and criminals is long! Because the words have specific legal meanings, only a short, basic definition is given below. You may wish to print out the list, and write the correct translation of the words in your own language.
In ordinary language, a crime is an unlawful act punishable by a state or other authority.[1] The term crime does not, in modern criminal law, have any simple and universally accepted definition,[2] though statutory definitions have been provided for certain purposes.[3] The most popular view is that crime is a category created by law; in other words, something is a crime if declared as such by the relevant and applicable law.[2] One proposed definition is that a crime or offence (or criminal offence) is an act harmful not only to some individual but also to a community, society, or the state ("a public wrong"). Such acts are forbidden and punishable by law.[1][4]
The notion that acts such as murder, rape, and theft are to be prohibited exists worldwide.[5] What precisely is a criminal offence is defined by the criminal law of each relevant jurisdiction. While many have a catalogue of crimes called the criminal code, in some common law nations no such comprehensive statute exists.
The state (government) has the power to severely restrict one's liberty for committing a crime. In modern societies, there are procedures to which investigations and trials must adhere. If found guilty, an offender may be sentenced to a form of reparation such as a community sentence, or, depending on the nature of their offence, to undergo imprisonment, life imprisonment or, in some jurisdictions, death.
While every crime violates the law, not every violation of the law counts as a crime. Breaches of private law (torts and breaches of contract) are not automatically punished by the state, but can be enforced through civil procedure.
The exact definition of crime is a philosophical issue without an agreed upon answer. Fields such as law, politics, sociology, and psychology define crime in different ways.[6] Crimes may be variously considered as wrongs against individuals, against the community, or against the state.[7] The criminality of an action is dependent on its context; acts of violence will be seen as crimes in many circumstances but as permissible or desirable in others.[8] Crime was historically seen as a manifestation of evil, but this has been superseded by modern criminal theories.[9]
Legal and political definitions of crime consider actions that are banned by authorities or punishable by law.[10] Crime is defined by the criminal law of a given jurisdiction, including all actions that are subject to criminal procedure. There is no limit to what can be considered a crime in a legal system, so there may not be a unifying principle used to determine whether an action should be designated as a crime.[11] From a legal perspective, crimes are generally wrong actions that are severe enough to warrant punishment that infringes on the perpetrator's liberties.[12]
English criminal law and the related common law of Commonwealth countries can define offences that the courts alone have developed over the years, without any actual legislation: common law offences. The courts used the concept of malum in se to develop various common law offences.[13]
As a sociological concept, crime is associated with actions that cause harm and violate social norms.[14] Under this definition, crime is a type of social construct,[15] and societal attitudes determine what is considered criminal.[16][17]
In legal systems based on legal moralism, the predominant moral beliefs of society determine the legal definition as well as the social definition of crime. This system is less prominent in liberal democratic societies that prioritize individualism and multiculturalism over other moral beliefs.[18]
The study of crime is called criminology.[16] Criminology is a subfield of sociology that addresses issues of social norms, social order, deviance, and violence. It includes the motivations and consequences of crime and its perpetrators, as well as preventative measures, either studying criminal acts on an individual level or the relationship of crime and the community.[20][21] Due to the wide range of concepts associated with crime and the disagreement on a precise definition, the focus of criminology can vary considerably.[16] Various theories within criminology provide different descriptions and explanations for crime, including social control theory, subcultural theory, strain theory, differential association, and labeling theory.[21]
Subfields of criminology and related fields of study include crime prevention, criminal law, crime statistics, anthropological criminology, criminal psychology, criminal sociology, criminal psychiatry, victimology, penology, and forensic science.[22] Besides sociology, criminology is often associated with law and psychology.[23]
Information and statistics about crime in a given jurisdiction are collected as crime estimates, typically produced by national or international agencies. Methods to collect crime statistics may vary, even between jurisdictions within the same nation.[24] Under-reporting of crime is common, particularly in developing nations.[25] Victim studies may be used to determine the frequency of crime in a given population.[24]
Justifying the state's use of force to coerce compliance with its laws has proven a consistent theoretical problem. One of the earliest justifications involved the theory of natural law. This posits that the nature of the world or of human beings underlies the standards of morality or constructs them. Thomas Aquinas wrote in the 13th century: "the rule and measure of human acts is the reason, which is the first principle of human acts".[26] He regarded people as by nature rational beings, concluding that it becomes morally appropriate that they should behave in a way that conforms to their rational nature. Thus, to be valid, any law must conform to natural law and coercing people to conform to that law is morally acceptable. In the 1760s, William Blackstone described the thesis:[27]
Thus the necessary and sufficient conditions for the truth of a proposition of law involved internal logic and consistency, and that the state's agents used state power with responsibility. Ronald Dworkin rejects Hart's theory and proposes that all individuals should expect the equal respect and concern of those who govern them as a fundamental political right. He offers a theory of compliance overlaid by a theory of deference (the citizen's duty to obey the law) and a theory of enforcement, which identifies the legitimate goals of enforcement and punishment. Legislation must conform to a theory of legitimacy, which describes the circumstances under which a particular person or group is entitled to make law, and a theory of legislative justice, which describes the law they are entitled or obliged to make.[29]
There are natural-law theorists who have accepted the idea of enforcing the prevailing morality as a primary function of the law.[30] This view entails the problem that it makes any moral criticism of the law impossible: if conformity with natural law forms a necessary condition for legal validity, all valid law must, by definition, count as morally just. Thus, on this line of reasoning, the legal validity of a norm necessarily entails its moral justice.[31]
The Romans systematized law and applied their system across the Roman Empire. The initial rules of Roman law regarded assaults as a matter of private compensation. The most significant Roman law concept involved dominion.[37] Most acts recognized as crimes in ancient societies, such as violence and theft, have persisted to the modern era.[38] The criminal justice system of Imperial China existed unbroken for over 2,000 years.[39]
Many of the earliest conceptions of crime are associated with sin and corresponded to acts that were believed to invoke the anger of a deity.[32] This idea was further popularized with the development of the Abrahamic religions. The understanding of crime and sin were closely associated with one another for much of history, and conceptions of crime took on many of the ideas associated with sin.[40] Islamic law developed its own system of criminal justice as Islam spread in the seventh and eighth centuries.[41]
In post-classical Europe and East Asia, central government was limited and crime was defined locally. Towns established their own criminal justice systems, while crime in the countryside was defined by the social hierarchies of feudalism.[42] In some places, such as the Russian Empire and the Kingdom of Italy, feudal justice survived into the 19th century.[43]
Common law first developed in England under the rule of Henry II in the 12th century. He established a system of traveling judges that tried accused criminals in each region of England by applying precedent from previous rulings.[44] Legal developments in 12th century England also resulted in the earliest known recording of official crime data.[33]
In the modern era, crime came to be seen as an issue affecting society rather than conflicts between individuals. Writers such as Thomas Hobbes saw crime as a societal issue as early as the 17th century.[9] Imprisonment developed as a long-term penalty for crime in the 18th century.[40] Increasing urbanization and industrialization in the 19th century caused crime to become an immediate issue that affected society, prompting government intervention in crime and the establishment of criminology as its own field.[9]
Anthropological criminology was popularized by Cesare Lombroso in the late-19th century. This was a biological determinist school of thought based in social darwinism, arguing that certain people are naturally born as criminals.[45] The eugenics movement of the early-20th century similarly held that crime was caused primarily by genetic factors.[46]
795a8134c1