Modern criminal justice systems face severe criticism for perpetuating structural inequality, protecting the wealthy, and controlling surplus labor, Gilmore, Ruth Wilson (2007). By criminalizing poverty and minor offenses, these systems create a permanent underclass that feeds the private prison industry and provides cheap inmate labor. Prison abolitionists argue that carceral systems cannot be truly reformed because they are inherently rooted in brutality, control, and historic frameworks of racial and economic oppression, Davis, Angela Y. (2003). Furthermore, when criminal justice relies solely on punitive measures and deterrence, its purpose becomes anchored in brutality and recidivism. While a system based on proportional punishment claims to provide a formal framework for accountability and restore moral balance, it ultimately satisfies a public desire for retribution without addressing the root causes of crime or rehabilitating offenders, Mathiesen, Thomas (1974).  To address these shortcomings, this study presents a cross-jurisdictional analysis of the criminal justice systems in India and Liberia. Adopting a comparative research methodology, this paper analyzes international legal instruments, judicial precedents, and domestic legislation to argue for an integrative approach that prioritizes corrective mechanisms, reform, and social reintegration. By dissecting legal frameworks, correctional mechanisms, and the balance between victim-offender reforms and state sovereignty, the study highlights a stark divergence. It finds that India’s transition from the colonial-era Indian Penal Code to a justice-oriented framework under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, represents a significant step toward a restorative justice model. Conversely, the Liberian Criminal Procedure Code reveals statutory stagnation, contrasting sharply with the modern legislative intent demonstrated by India’s BNS.