Strictly speaking, a crime is an act forbidden by the law of the land, and one which is considered sufficiently serious to warrant providing penalties for its commission. It does not necessarily follow that this act is either good or bad; the punishment follows for the violation of the law and not necessarily for any moral transgression. No doubt most of the things forbidden by the penal code are as such are injurious to the organized society of the time and place, and are usually of such a character as for a long period of time, and in most countries, have been classed as criminal. But even then it does not always follow that the violator of the law is not a person of higher type than the majority who are directly and indirectly responsible for the law. It is apparent that a thing is not necessarily bad because it is forbidden by the law.
What is the central idea of the passage?
Result:
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Option 3: "Crime cannot be clearly demarcated and depends on the prevalent beliefs of the society."
Explanation: This option accurately reflects the main idea of the passage, which argues that the definition of crime is not fixed and varies according to societal beliefs. The text states that there is no clear division of what constitutes a crime, highlighting the subjective nature of legal definitions.
Option 1: "The ruling class and the people with power decide the laws and the punishment."
Explanation: This option suggests a specific source of authority for laws and punishments, which is not addressed in the text. The passage discusses the nature of crime and punishment without attributing the creation of laws to a ruling class. Therefore, this option misrepresents the text's focus.
Option 2: "The basis of punishment is not morality but transgression of law."
Explanation: While the text does mention that punishment follows the violation of law rather than moral transgression, it does not imply that this is the central idea. The passage emphasizes the ambiguity of defining crime rather than focusing solely on the basis of punishment.
Option 4: "Things that are forbidden do not necessarily attract punishment."
Explanation: This option implies that forbidden actions do not always lead to punishment, which is not the focus of the text. The passage discusses the nature of crime and punishment but does not claim that forbidden actions are exempt from penalties, making this option misleading.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation