INTRODUCTION
Community service as a form of punishment is based on the idea that punishment should not only penalise wrongdoing, but also repair harm, and reinforce social integration. In Western legal systems, such as in the United Kingdom and the United States, community service has long been used as an alternative to incarceration, particularly for minor and non-violent offences. These measures aim to reduce prison overcrowding and allow offenders to make positive contributions to society.[1]
In India, the concept of community service did not historically have a place in criminal sentencing. Traditional criminal law under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) recognised punishments such as imprisonment (simple and rigorous), fines, forfeiture of property and the death penalty, but not community service.[2] Judicial practice, however, did see occasional use of community service conditions, especially in juvenile cases under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.[3] These developments reflected a broader shift towards reformative justice, reinforced by policy-level recommendations such as those of the Justice V.S. Malimath Committee, which explicitly advocated the inclusion of community service as an alternative punishment to reduce incarceration and promote rehabilitation.[4]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK UNDER NEW CRIMINAL LAWS
The BNS 2023, which replaced the IPC with effect from 1 July 2024, introduced community service as a distinct form of punishment in Indian criminal law for the first time.[5]
Section 4(f) of the BNS recognises community service as an additional punishment alongside imprisonment and fines. The statute does not yet define the precise nature of community service, but it makes clear that it is a non-custodial requirement imposed on offenders for the benefit of the community.
Complementing this, Section 23 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, provides that community service may be ordered as work for the community without remuneration.[6] The statute captures the reformative essence of the punishment but stops short of specifying mechanisms for supervision, compliance monitoring or the minimum and maximum duration of service hours.
Community service has been prescribed as a sentencing option for certain minor offences, including:
- Public servants unlawfully engaging in trade,
- Non-appearance in response to a legal proclamation,
- Attempted suicide intended to influence lawful power,
- Petty theft, where the stolen property value is low, restitution is made,
- Misconduct in public due to intoxication,
- [7]
These provisions reflect a legislative shift towards restorative and proportional sentencing, particularly for less serious crimes.
TRANSLATING LAW INTO PRACTICE
Legislative change alone does not guarantee judicial implementation. Recognising this, several states have issued executive notifications to operationalise community service. In 2025, the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi published notification guidelines specifying the kinds of tasks that courts may assign when ordering community service. These include cleaning hospitals and public spaces, helping with library and park maintenance and organising public resources. The notification also suggests durations ranging from one day to up to 240 hours based on offence, severity and judicial discretion.
Likewise, the government of Tamil Nadu announced rules, detailing 16 specific community service tasks for offenders convicted under relevant sections of the new criminal laws, including public service rules in classrooms, parks, hospitals, old-age homes and other public institutions.[8] Importantly, other states have also begun adopting similar frameworks, including Haryana, either through draft guidelines or district-level initiatives signalling that community service is being tested beyond isolated jurisdictions.[9]
Such notifications help operationalise the statutory provisions and provide clarity to courts and probation officers. These notifications indicate an important transition, namely, moving from legal recognition of community service to practical frameworks for implementation.
ALIGNMENT WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
The move towards community service also places the Indian criminal justice framework in closer alignment with international sentencing norms. For instance, instruments such as the ‘UN Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures’ (the Tokyo Rules) were adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1990. It provides internationally accepted guidelines encouraging courts to use alternatives to imprisonment (including community-based sanctions, particularly for minor offences).
Comparatively, the United Kingdom’s Unpaid Work Requirement under its Community Payback Scheme prescribes structured service, ranging between 40 and 300 hours, supported by trained probation officers and monitoring mechanisms.[10] The absence of similar structural clarity in India underscores the need for detailed guidelines.
JUDICIAL PRACTICE: RECENT TRENDS
One of the strongest indicators of judicial reception of community service as punishment comes from recent judgments and court orders:
In mid-2025, the Delhi High Court quashed an FIR lodged under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, but required the accused to undertake one month of community service at a government hospital as part of the resolution. The judge emphasised that community service could promote reflection and accountability, even where formal prosecution was dispensed with.[11]
In Jaipur, two men caught drinking in public, a minor offence under Section 355 of the BNSS, were sentenced to two days of community service at a local school and hospital, respectively – one of the earliest applications of the statutory provision in Rajasthan.[12]
Courts in Chandigarh directed offenders found drinking in public to perform community service at cow shelters and old age homes, signalling a judicial shift from fines to community work for minor social offences.[13]
The Madhya Pradesh High Court innovatively required an accused student to perform community service as a condition of temporary bail explicitly, recognising the rehabilitative value of such service in the context of reformative jurisprudence.[14]
These examples reveal emerging trends in judicial practice: Indian courts are increasingly integrating community service into sentencing and pre-trial conditions, sometimes even beyond the express list of offences in the BNS/BNSS. However, the practice is not yet uniform. Several courts have expressed concerns about possible violations of personal liberty and constitutional safeguards where community services are imposed without clear, statutory backing or procedural safeguards. Hence, there is a need for uniform sentencing guidelines to prevent inconsistency and arbitrariness in punishment.[15] This points to the need for clearer guidelines.
GAPS AND WEAKNESSES IN THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK
An endeavour has been made to align the legislative intent, the state notifications and judicial practice, yet the gaps remain. Some courts have ordered community service, not as per BNS/BNSS but as conditions attached to bond applications or in quashing of FIR, for instance. This reflects judicial creativity, but also legal uncertainty. Moreover, Indian courts currently lack consistent standards for determining appropriate service types and durations. This risks uneven enforcement and reduces the rehabilitative impact of the punishment. To date, there is no Supreme Court judgment setting out clear principles on when and how community service should be ordered, resulting in fragmented implementation by district-level discretion.
REFORMS AND PATH FORWARD
To strengthen community service as a meaningful punishment in India, several reforms merit consideration:
- The BNS/BNSS should include a comprehensive statutory definition of community service, specifying eligible offenders, types of permissible service, minimum and maximum hours and compliance criteria, etc.
- The establishment of a centralised monitoring mechanism involving probation officers and district administration. This would mirror systems like the UK’s ‘Community Payback’ model, where structured supervision improves compliance.
- The Supreme Court or a national judicial academy should issue sentencing guidelines on community service, enabling consistent application across jurisdictions.
- Empirical studies on the impact of community service sentences should be encouraged to assess recidivism rates, community benefit outcomes and offender rehabilitation.
CONCLUSION
Community service has transitioned from being an informal judicial tool to a formal statutory punishment in India’s reformed criminal justice framework. The recognition of community service marks a progressive shift towards restorative justice, aligning Indian law with global practices that emphasise repairing harm over pure retribution.
Recent judicial decisions show cautious but real adoption of this punishment, even as courts continue to innovate within existing legal space. Nonetheless, consistent standards, clear definitions, and robust implementation mechanisms remain essential to ensure that community service fulfils its rehabilitative promise, rather than becoming a symbolic measure.
Author: Malika Agarwal (National Forensic Sciences University, Delhi)
References:
[1] Andrew Ashworth, Sentencing and Criminal Justice (6th edn, Cambridge University Press 2015)
[2] Indian Penal Code 1860, s 53
[3] Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015
[4] Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System, Report, vol I (Ministry of Home Affairs 2003)
[5] Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, s 4(f)
[6] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 23
[7] Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, ss 202, 209, 226, 303(2), 355 and 356(2)
[8] Omjasvin M D, ‘TN govt introduces 16 community services as a measure of punishment’ The Times of India (23 August 2025) <https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/tn-govt-introduces-16-community-services-as-measure-of-punishment/articleshow/123460888.cms> accessed 15 March 2026
[9] Geetanjali Gayatri, ‘Haryana: Community service guidelines notified for first-time offenders’ The Tribune (19 August 2025) <https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/haryana/community-service-guidelines-notified-for-first-time-offenders/ accessed 15 March 2026
[10] Criminal Justice Act 2003 (UK)
[11] Zihad Ahmed v State of NCT of Delhi & Anr (2025) DHC 4795
[12] ‘2 Kota men to do community service for drinking in public’ The Times of India (21 Aug 2025) <https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/2-kota-men-to-do-community-service-for-drinking-in-public/articleshow/123418784.cms> accessed 17 March 2026
[13] Pawan Tiwari, ‘Public drinkers sentenced to serve in cow shelters, old age homes’ The Times of India (18 Aug 2025) <https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/public-drinkers-sentenced-to-serve-in-cow-shelters-old-age-homes/articleshow/123350716.cms> accessed 17 March 2026
[14] Abhishek Sharma v The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025) MCRC No 16788/2025
[15] Anurag Mishra and Yash Raj, ‘Community Service: A Progressive Shift Introduced by Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita’, (LiveLaw, 19 June 2024) <https://www.livelaw.in/lawschool/articles/community-service-bharatiya-nyaya-sanhita-indian-penal-code-juvenile-justice-act-national-crime-records-bureau-260813> accessed 17 March 2026
