2026 Supreme(SC) 384

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.K. Maheshwari, Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ.
Milind S/O Ashruba Dhanve And Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1893 of 2026 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 6843 OF 2024)
Decided On : 10-04-2026

IMPORTANT POINT
(1) Benefit of probation – 1958 Act seeks to harmonize deterrence and reformation while empowering courts to release offenders after admonition or on probation of good conduct under supervision of Probation Officer.
(2) Section 360 of CrPC and Sections 3 and 4 of 1958 Act share a common thread i.e., reformation but their framework differs in their scope and structure.
(3) If two or more views are possible vis-a-vis interpretation of a beneficial legislation, it must be interpreted in favour of beneficiaries.

Headnote:

(A) Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 – Section 4 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 360 [Section 40 of BNSS] – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 53 [Section 4 of BNS] – Benefit of probation – 1958 Act is a beneficial legislation – Object and purpose of 1958 Act is to rehabilitate offenders and make attempt to reintegrate them into mainstream of society as reformed citizens, rather than to punish for their delinquent actions – Keeping legislative intent in mind, its provisions ought to be interpreted in a purposive manner – 1958 Act seeks to harmonize deterrence and reformation while empowering courts to release offenders after admonition or on probation of good conduct under supervision of Probation Officer – It saves offenders from stigma of conviction as well as imprisonment and affords them opportunity to return to social life with dignity – 1958 Act requires purposive interpretation keeping in mind its objectives – In case a person has been released after admonition under Section 3 or on probation of good conduct under Section 4, they shall not face disqualification attaching to such conviction – Benefit of Section 4 of 1958 Act is available to an offender who has been sentenced only to payment of fine. (Paras 11, 12, 17, 19 and 25)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 360 [Section 40 of BNSS] – Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 – Section 4 – Benefit of probation – Section 360 of CrPC and Sections 3 and 4 of 1958 Act share a common thread i.e., reformation but their framework differs in their scope and structure – Section 360 of CrPC creates eligibility distinctions based on age and gender – In case of persons under 21 years of age and women, benefit is extended to all offences not punishable with death or life imprisonment, while restricting person not below 21 years of age to offences carrying a maximum of seven years or less or fine only – On other hand, Sections 3 and 4 of 1958 Act, extend benefit universally without any age or gender classification, focusing on nature of offence and character of offender – Benefit under Section 360(1) and (3) of CrPC can enure only in absence of a prior conviction, whereas Section 4 of 1958 Act leaves antecedents of offender to Court's discretion, and Section 3 of 1958 Act while requiring absence of prior conviction also expands concept of previous conviction to include prior orders under Section 3 and 4 of 1958 Act itself – Section 360 CrPC is bereft of any supervisory mechanism whatsoever, while Section 4 of 1958 Act establishes an elaborate mechanism involving probation officers, supervision orders, and conditions as prescribed in sub-section (3) and (4) – 1958 Act contemplates report of probation officer which is absent from framework of Section 360 CrPC. (Paras 28, 29 and 39)

(C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 – Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 – Section 4 – Hurt – Common intention – Conviction and sentence – Prayer for grant of benefit of probation – Appellants were convicted under Sections 323 and 324 of IPC and allegations as proved relates to assault upon persons belonging to same locality – Appellants were sentenced to pay fine of only Rs. 500/- under Section 323 and Rs. 2000/- under Section 324 of IPC – Trial Court as well as High Court did not award any imprisonment to Appellants and directed only payment of fine – While confirming conviction, appellants be granted benefit under Section 4(1) of 1958 Act and instead of sentencing them, they be released on entering into bond for one year before jurisdictional Trial Court with sureties. (Paras 40 and 42)

Facts of the case:

Present appeal is against final judgment and order dated 26.02.2024 of High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, in Criminal Appeal No. 506 of 2023. High Court upheld conviction and sentence for the charge of Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, as determined by Special Judge (POCSO), Beed. Issues that fall for our consideration are - (i) Whether Appellants are entitled to benefit of Sections 3 and 4 of 1958 Act, and if so, to what extent?; (ii) Whether benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 is available to an offender who has been sentenced only with payment of fine, and not to any term of imprisonment?

Findings of Court:

Since all Appellants have been extended benefit under Sections 3 and 4 of 1958 Act, they shall not incur any disqualification affecting their service career, if any, arising out of conviction, in terms of Section 12 of the 1958 Act.

Result : Appeal disposed of.