ii i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ii iiiii

DAMODARAM iSANJIVAYYA iNATIONAL iLAW iUNIVERSITY

iVISAKHAPATNAM, iA.P., iINDIA

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i iNAME iOF iTHE iPROJECT iTOPIC

i iiiiiiiiiiiiii iPROBATION iIN iPETTY iOFFENCES

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i iSUBJECT

ii i i i i i i i i i i i i i i iCODE iOF iCRIMINAL iPROCEDURE

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i NAME iOF iTHE iFACULTY

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iAssitant iProff: iMs iSoma.B

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i NAME iOF iTHE iSTUDENT

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iKranthi iKiran. iT

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i iRegd iNo. i18LLB127

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ii iSec: iB

i
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i iIV iSemester

1
 i i i i i i iACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I iheart ifully iexpress imy ispecial ithanks ito imy isubject iteacher; iAssistant iProf: iMs
iSoma.B ifor igiving ime ithe iopportunity ito ido ithe iproject ion ithe itopic i“PROBATION
iIN iPETTY iOFFENCES”. iIt ihelped ime ito iknow imany ithings iand igain iknowledge. iI
ialso ithank iher ifor iguiding ime ithroughout ithe iproject iand iresponding ifor imy idoubts
iregarding ithe iproject.

I iwould ialso ilike ito ithank imy iUniversity i‘Damodaram iSanjivayya iNational iLaw
iUniversity’ ifor iproviding ime iwith iall ithe irequired imaterials ifor ithe icompletion iof imy
iproject iand iI ialso icame ito iknow imany inew ithings.

2
 Table of Contents

Chapter I: Meaning &Introduction …………………………………………7-12

• Who is a petty offender or what constitutes a petty offence?

• List of Petty Offences

• Offences which used to be petty now became heinous

• Offences which were heinous in nature now considered as petty offence

Chapter II: Statutory provisions on probation ..........................................12-15

• Probation of offenders Act 1958

• Salient Features of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958
• Object of section 360 of Cr.P.C

Chapter III: Admonition & Probation: …………………………………..15-22

• Admonition for first time petty offenders.

• Case Laws
• Different types of probation
• Probation based release
• Overlapping Jurisdictions of Sections 3 & 4:
• Entering into a bond with or without sureties
• Case Laws

Chapter IV: Powers and Obligations under the Probation of Offenders Act,
1958: The Magistrate ……………………………………………………22-25

• What are the powers of the court to pass supervision orders?

• Providing grounds to use the Act in the case of young offenders (18-21):

3
 • Can the court change its decision on duration and conditions of the
bond?
• What happens if the offender breaks the bond?

Chapter V: What is the context and provision for probation under the JJA?
……………………………………………………………………………….26-29

• Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 The JJ Board and Review of Cases

• Model Prisons Manual, 2003 :
(i) Court of Young Offenders
(ii) Pre-Sentence Investigation Report
• Mulla Committee Report, 1983
(i) What are the Mulla Committee’s recommendations for young offenders?

Chapter VI: Powers and Obligations: The Probation Officer ……….....30-32

• Appointment of Probation Officer by Court

• Inquiring, reporting and supervising probationers

Chapter VII: Offences in Which Probation Cannot Be Granted ………32-34

• Case Laws
• The provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 normally cannot be
applied to:

Chapter VIII: Benefits and problems ………………………………………34-37

Chapter IX: Statistics of Offenders Convicted and confined for Petty

Offences: …………………………………………………………………….37-40

Chapter X: Recommendations ……………………………………………41

Chapter XI: Conclusion& Bibliography ………………………………42-43

4
 Synopsis

Title: iProbation iin ipetty iOffences

Introduction: i

iThe iprobation iServices iin iIndia iare ibeing iregulated iby iProbation iof iOffenders iAct,
i1958 iand iSection i360 iof iCode iof iCriminal iProcedure i1973 iwhich iallows irelease iof ian
ioffender ion iprobation ion ifulfilling icertain iconditions iin ilieu iof ihis\ iher istay iin iprison
ion iconviction.

The iSection i562 iof ithe iCr.P.C i(1898) iwas ithe iearliest iprovision iwhich idealt iwith
iprobation. iHowever iafter ithe iamendment iin i1974 iit ibecame ithe iSection i360.

However, iunder ithe isection i360 iof ithe iCr.P.C, iBenefit iof iprobation ican ionly ibe igiven
ito ithe ifirst itime ioffenders iwhile ithe isection i4 iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct iallows
ibenefits ifor iprobation ito irepeat iand ipetty ioffenders ias iwell. iSection i3 i& i4 iof
iprobation iof ioffenders iAct iallow i1st itime ipetty ioffenders ito ibe ireleased. iSection i3 iof
ithis iact ideals iwith itreatment iof iFirst itime ipetty ioffenders ifound iguilty iof icertain
ispecified ioffences ior ioffences ipunishable iwith inot imore ithan i2 iyears iof iimprisonment.
iIt iprovides irelease iof isuch ioffenders iafter idue iadmonition.

Under i206(2) iof iCode iof iCriminal iProcedure iPetty iOffence imeans iany ioffence
ipunishable ionly iwith ifine inot iexceeding ione ithousand iRupees.

The ipower iof icourt ito irelease icertain ioffenders iafter iadmonition- ioffence ipunishable
iunder isection i379 ior i380 ior i381\ i404\420 iof iIndian iPenal icode,1860 ii.e ilike itheft iin
idwelling ihose iand idishonest imis iappropriation iof i iproperty ipossessed iby ideceased
iperson ietc.

Research iQuestions:

1. Whether ipetty iOffence iunder iCr.P.C iincludes iany ioffence iso ipunishable iunder ithe
iMotor iVehicle iAct i1931?

5
 2. Whether iprobation ilaw ihelps iin ieliminating iovercrowding iin ijails iby ikeeping
imany ioffenders iaway ifrom itheir iunder iprobation ilaw?
3. Whether ithere iis iundue irisk ithat iduring ithe iperiod iof isuspended isentence ior ia
iprobation ithe idefendant iwill icommit ianother icrime?
4. Whether ithe icourt ishould irelease ian ioffender ion iprobation iwho iare iin ineed iof
isuch ia irelease iare inot iin ia iposition ito iprovide isureties?
5. Whether ithe iwork iload iof iprobation iofficers, iboth iin iterms iof ipre-sentence
iinvestigation iand isupervision iboth iare iheaviest?
6. Whether iIndia ishould igo iin ifor iprobation iprogrammes iin ia isincere iand ieffective
iway iand ia ibetter iawareness iof iprobation isystem ishall ihave ito ibe icreated?

Literature iReview:

• PSA iPillai's iCriminal iLaw: iIncorporating ithe iCriminal iLaw i(Amendment) iAct,
i2013
• Criminal iLaw: iCases iand iMaterials, iAuthor: iK.D. iGaur, i1985.
• Ratanlal iand iDhirajlal’s ithe iCode iof iCriminal iProcedure, i22nd iedition, i2017.
• Criminal iProcedure iCode iof iIndia: iIndian iLaw iSeries, i21 iApril i2015 iAuthor:
iShubham iSinha
• R.V. ikelkar’s iLectures ion iCriminal iprocedure: iIncluding iProbation iand ijuvenile
ijustice
By iK.N iChandrasekharan ipillai, i6th iedition i2017.

Objective iof ithe istudy:

• The imain iobjective iis ito icritically istudy iSection i360 iof icode iof icriminal
iprocedure iand iSection i206 iof iCr.P.C iand isection i3&4 iof iProbation iof iOffenders
iAct, i1958.
• The iObjective iof ithe iAct iis ito iprevent ithe iyouthful ioffenders ifrom iturning iinto
iCriminals iby ithem iwhen iassociated iwith ihardened iCriminals.
• To iReform ithe iOffender iby imeans iof iConstructive itreatment iwould ialso ibe
icritically istudied. i

6
Research iMethodology:

A) Nature iof iStudy:

The StudyiisiDoctrinal itype. It iis ia icomposition iof idescriptive, iAnalytical iand iexplanatory.

B) Sources:

Primary iSources: iBare iActs iCr.P.C, i1972.

Secondary iSources: iBooks, ijournals, iArticles, iDictionaries ietc.

C) Mode iof iCitation: iBlue ibook i19th iedition.

Scope iof iStudy:

• To iStudy ithe iProcess iof iProbation ifor iPetty iOffences iwith iRelevant iCases.
• To iStudy ithe iPowers iand iObligations iunder ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958
• To iStudy ithe iduties iand iroles ientitled ito ia iProbation iOfficer iunder iProbation iof
iOffenders iAct.

Significance iof ithe iStudy:

• To istudy ithe ibenefits ithose iare iobtained iby ithis iprobation.

• To istudy ior iunderstand ihow iOffences iare iprevented ifor ihappening ifurther
ibecause ithe iwork iof iprobation iis ipreventive iand icurative.

Meaning i&Introduction: i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i

Probation iis ian ialternative ito iimprisonment, iand iis iconsidered ithe imost iviable isentencing
ioption ifor ijuveniles, iyoung ioffenders, ifirst itime iand ipetty ioffenders iand ieven irepeat
ioffenders. iThe ipurpose iof iprobation iis ia ireform iof ithe ioffender iby imeans ithat iare
ialternative ito ipunishment isuch ias iadmonition, iconstructive itreatment, iconditions iof igood
iconduct, iand isupervision irather ithan ipunishment iand iincarceration, iby iwhich, ioffenders,
iinstead iof ibeing isent ito ijail, iare iput iunder ithe icare iof ia iProbation iOfficer iby ithe
iCourt, ithus isaving ithem ifrom istigma iand iinfluence iof ihardened icriminals. iWhile

7
iinfliction iof ipunishment ihas ias iits iobjective ithe isuffering iof ithe ioffender, iprobation iis
iintended iat ireformation iand ire-socialization iin iline iwith ithe ireform iof ithe ipenal isystem.
iIt iis iguided iby ithe ibelief ithat imany ioffenders iare inot idangerous icriminals ibut ihave
iacted iin imisfortune, iimprovidence, imisguidance, iand ihave ilanded iin iconflict iwith ilaw.

The iobject iof iCriminal iLaw iis imore iinclined itowards ithe ireformation iof ithe ioffender
ithan ito ipunish ihim. iInstead iof ikeeping ian iaccused iwith ihardened icriminals iin ia iprison,
ithe icourt ican iorder ipersonal ifreedom ion ipromise iof igood ibehaviour iand ican ialso iorder
ia iperiod iof isupervision iover ian ioffender. iThis iis ithe iconcept ibehind i‘probation’.
iBlack’s ilaw idictionary idefines i‘probation’ ias i‘allowing ia iperson iconvicted iof isome
iminor ioffence i(particularly ijuvenile ioffenders) ito igo iat ilarge, iunder ia isuspension iof
isentence, iduring igood ibehaviour, iand igenerally iunder ithe isupervision ior iguardianship iof
ia i‘probation iofficer’. iIt iis ibelieved ithat iimprisonment idecreases ithe icapacity iof ian
ioffender ito ireadjust ito ithe inormal isociety iafter ithe irelease iand iassociation iwith
iprofessional idelinquents ioften ihas iundesired ieffects ion ihim iand ihis ilife ithereafter.

Probation is a socialized penal device which has come up as the result of modification, over a
period of time, of the doctrine of deterrence into the principle of reformation; a development that
paved the way to the introduction of clinical approach and the principle of individualization in
the handling of offenders. According to a report of the United Nations, Department of Social
Affairs, ‘Release of offenders on probation is a treatment device prescribed by the court for the
persons convicted of offences against the law, during which the probationer lives in the
community and regulates his own life under conditions imposed by the court or other constituted
authority, and is subject to the supervision by a probation officer’. The suspension of sentence
under probation serves the dual purpose of deterrence and reformation. It provides necessary
help and guidance to the probationer in his rehabilitation and at the same time the threat of being
subjected to unexhausted sentence acts as a sufficient deterrent to keep him away from
criminality.

1
Incarceration ican ihave ia inegative iimpact ion ioffenders, iespecially, iif ithey iare ijuvenile
ior ifirst itime ioffenders ibecause ithey iare ilikely ito icome iin icontact iwith icriminals

1
iNational iCrime iRecords iBureau, iMinistry iof iHome iAffairs, iCrime iin iIndia iStatistics, i2011, ip i13.

8
icharged iwith iserious ior iheinous ioffences iwhen isent ito ijail. iThis, iin iturn, ican ilead ito
ithe ipossibility iof ia irelapse iinto icrime iand ieven ihardening iof ipersonality irather ithan
iimproving isocial ibehavior. iProbation iis iintended ias ia inon- icustodial itreatment ifor ithose
ioffenders iwho iare ilikely ito inot ire-offend iif iappropriate isupervision iis iprovided.

Who iis ia ipetty ioffender ior iwhat iconstitutes ia ipetty ioffence?

2
Section i206 iof ithe iCode iof iCriminal iProcedure iprovides iabridged iprocedure iin ithe
idisposal iof i‘petty ioffences’. iAs iper iSection i206(2) iof ithe iCode, i‘petty ioffence’ imeans
iany ioffence ipunishable ionly iwith ifine inot iexceeding ione ithousand irupees, ibut idoes inot
iinclude iany ioffence iso ipunishable iunder ithe iMotor iVehicles iAct, i1939, ior iunder iany
iother ilaw iwhich iprovides ifor iconvicting ithe iaccused iperson iin ihis iabsence ion ia iplea
iof iguilty.

The ioffences iwhich iare ibailable ior inon-cognizable ior icompoundable ior ipunishable iwith
ishort iterm iimprisonment iwith ior iwithout ifine, ior iwith ifine ialone. iAnyone icharged
iunder isuch isections iis iconsidered ia ipetty ioffender. iSections i27 iand i27(2) iof ithe iCode
iof iCriminal iProcedure i(Cr.P.C), i1973 iinitially ireferred ito isuch ipetty ioffences iand ithe
i‘jurisdiction iof icourts iin icase iof ioffences icommitted iby ijuveniles’ ibut ithese isections,
ihave, isince ithe iJuvenile iJustice iAct i(Care iand iProtection) iAct, i2000, icame iinto iforce
ibecome iredundant ibut ibeen iabsorbed iin ithe iJJ iAct iof i2000.

List iof iPetty ioffences:

1. iNeedlessly ipulling ithe iemergency ialarm ichain iin ia itrain
2. iDownloading ior iuploading ipirated imovies, imusic ior isoftware
3. iUse iof icrash iguards ion icars ior itwo-wheelers
Installation iof icrash iguards, ia.k.a. ibull iguards, ion ivehicles iis ian ioffence iunder isection
i52 iof ithe iMotor iVehicles iAct, i1988.The iMinistry iof iRoad iTransport iand iHighways ihas
iordered ithe itransport icommissioners iof iall istates iand iunion iterritories ito itake iactions
iagainst ithe iunauthorized iuse iof isuch ifitments ithrough ia inotification i(dated i07/12/2017).

2
iRatanlal&Dhirajlal, ithe icode iof icriminal iprocedure i,22nd iEdn, i2017

9
4.Smoking iin ipublic iplaces
5. iVoting ias ianother iperson ior ivoting itwice iat ithe ielection
6. iPossessing imultiple iPAN icards
7. iChallans iunder ipolice iact
8. iTrespassing iinto ia istranger’s ihouse
9. iThrowing istone/wood/or iany iother ithing iat ia itrain

Section i150 iof ithe iRailways iAct, i1989 imakes ithrowing ia istone, iwood ior iany iother
iobject iat ior iacross iany irailway ipunishable iby iimprisonment ifor ilife ior irigorous
iimprisonment ifor iup ito iten iyears.

10. iSimple iAssault i

11. i iTheft

12. i iDrunk iand iDrive

13. iDriving iVehicle iwithout iLicense

14. iDefamation

15. iPrinting ior isale iof idefamatory imatter

16. iCriminal iintimidation, iannoyance, iinsult.

17. iFood iadulteration

18. iRioting

019. iCausing ivoluntarily ihurt

20. iMischief

10
21. iimplication iunder iPublic igambling iact

22. iUnlawful icompulsory ilabour

Offences iwhich iused ito ibe ipetty inow ibecame iheinous:

1. Violation iof itraffic irules ias iaccidents iare igetting iincreased.

2. Stalking

Earlier ithere iwas ino iprovision ifor icyber icrimes ispecifically ibut inow ias icrime irate ihas
ibeen iincreased iso iInformation iTechnology iact iwas iintroduced iin i2000.

3. Web ihijacking

4. Child ipornography

5. Software ipiracy

6. Assault ior icriminal iforce ito iwomen ito ioutrage iher imodesty

7. Electronic imoney ilaundering

8. Cyber ifraud

Offences iwhich iwere iheinous iin inature inow iconsidered ias ipetty ioffence:

In i1723 ia isystem iknown ias ithe iBloody iCode iwas iestablished iin iBritain, iwhich iimposed
ithe ideath ipenalty ifor iover i200 ioffences i– imany iof iwhich iwere isurprisingly itrivial.

• arson
• forgery
• cutting idown itrees
• stealing ihorses ior isheep

11
 • destroying iturnpike iroads
• stealing ifrom ia irabbit iwarren
• pick ipocketing igoods iworth ia ishilling
• being ian iunmarried imother iconcealing ia istillborn ichild
• stealing ifrom ia ishipwreck
• wrecking ia ifishpond

Statutory iprovisions ion iprobation:

Probation iof ioffenders iAct i1958:

Section i3: iPower iof icourt ito irelease icertain ioffenders iafter iadmonition.

When iany iperson iis ifound iguilty iof ihaving icommitted ian ioffence ipunishable iunder
isection i379 ior isection i380 ior isection i381 ior isection i404 ior isection i420 iof ithe iIndian
iPenal iCode, i(45 iof i1860) ior iany ioffence ipunishable iwith iimprisonment ifor inot imore
ithan itwo iyears, ior iwith ifine, ior iwith iboth, iunder ithe iIndian iPenal iCode, ior iany iother
ilaw, iand ino iprevious iconviction iis iproved iagainst ihim iand ithe icourt iby iwhich ithe
iperson iis ifound iguilty iis iof iopinion ithat, ihaving iregard ito ithe icircumstances iof ithe
icase iincluding ithe inature iof ithe ioffence, iand ithe icharacter iof ithe ioffender, iit iis
iexpedient iso ito ido, ithen, inotwithstanding ianything icontained iin iany iother ilaw ifor ithe
itime ibeing iin iforce, ithe icourt imay, iinstead iof isentencing ihim ito iany ipunishment ior
ireleasing ihim ion iprobation iof igood iconduct iunder isection i4 irelease ihim iafter idue
iadmonition.

Section i4
Power iof icourt ito irelease icertain ioffenders ion iprobation iof igood iconduct.

When iany iperson iis ifound iguilty iof ihaving icommitted ian ioffence inot ipunishable iwith
ideath ior iimprisonment ifor ilife iand ithe icourt iby iwhich ithe iperson iis ifound iguilty iis iof
iopinion ithat, ihaving iregard ito ithe icircumstances iof ithe icase iincluding ithe inature iof ithe
ioffence iand ithe icharacter iof ithe ioffender, iit iis iexpedient ito irelease ihim ion iprobation
iof igood iconduct, ithen, inotwithstanding ianything icontained iin iany iother ilaw ifor ithe
itime ibeing iin iforce, ithe icourt imay, iinstead iof isentencing ihim iat ionce ito iany
ipunishment idirect ithat ihe ibe ireleased ion ihis ientering iinto ia ibond, iwith ior iwithout
isureties, ito iappear iand ireceive isentence iwhen icalled iupon iduring isuch iperiod, inot
iexceeding ithree iyears, ias ithe icourt imay idirect, iand iin ithe imeantime ito ikeep ithe ipeace
iand ibe iof igood ibehavior.

Section i5

iPower iof icourt ito irequire ireleased ioffenders ito ipay icompensation iand icosts.

12
 iThe icourt idirecting ithe irelease iof ian ioffender iunder isection i3 ior isection i4, imay, iif iit
ithinks ifit, imake iat ithe isame itime ia ifurther iorder idirecting ihim ito ipay— i(a) isuch
icompensation ias ithe icourt ithinks ireasonable ifor iloss ior iinjury icaused ito iany iperson iby
ithe icommission iof ithe ioffence; iand i(b) isuch icosts iof ithe iproceedings ias ithe icourt
ithinks ireasonable. i(2) iThe iamount iordered ito ibe ipaid iunder isub-section i(1) imay ibe
irecovered ias ia ifine iin iaccordance iwith ithe iprovisions iof isections i386 iand i387 iof ithe
iCode. i(3) iA icivil icourt itrying iany isuit, iarising iout iof ithe isame imatter ifor iwhich ithe
ioffender iis iprosecuted, ishall itake iinto iaccount iany iamount ipaid ior irecovered ias
icompensation iunder isub-section i(1) iin iawarding idamages.

Section i6
Restrictions ion iimprisonment iof ioffenders iunder itwenty-one iyears iof iage.

When iany iperson iunder itwenty-one iyears iof iage iis ifound iguilty iof ihaving icommitted
ian ioffence ipunishable iwith iimprisonment i(but inot iwith iimprisonment ifor ilife), ithe icourt
iby iwhich ithe iperson iis ifound iguilty ishall inot isentence ihim ito iimprisonment iunless iit
iis isatisfied ithat, ihaving iregard ito ithe icircumstances iof ithe icase iincluding ithe inature iof
ithe ioffence iand ithe icharacter iof ithe ioffender, iit iwould inot ibe idesirable ito ideal iwith
ihim iunder isection i3 ior isection i4, iand iif ithe icourt ipasses iany isentence iof iimprisonment
ion ithe ioffender, iit ishall irecord iits ireasons ifor idoing iso.

(2) iFor ithe ipurpose iof isatisfying iitself iwhether iit iwould inot ibe idesirable ito ideal iunder
isection i3 ior isection i4 iwith ian ioffender ireferred ito iin isub-section i(1) ithe icourt ishall
icall ifor ia ireport ifrom ithe iprobation iofficer iand iconsider ithe ireport, iif iany, iand iany
iother iinformation iavailable ito iit irelating ito ithe icharacter iand iphysical iand imental
icondition iof ithe ioffender.

3
Salient iFeatures iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958
The iProbation iof iOffenders iAct i(Act iNo. i28 iof i1958) icontains ielaborate iprovisions
irelating ito iprobation iof ioffenders, iwhich iare imade iapplicable ithroughout ithe icountry.
iWe iwill inow iobserve ithe isalient ifeatures iof ithe iAct:-

1. The iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958 iis iintended ito ireform ithe ifirst iand irepeat
ioffenders iby iproviding irehabilitation iin isociety iand ito iprevent ithe iconversion iof
iyouthful ioffenders iinto iobdurate icriminals iunder ienvironmental iinfluence iby
ikeeping ithem iin ijails ialong iwith ihardened icriminals.

3
ihttp://jjscup.gov.in/docs/the-probation-of-offenders-act-1958.pdf

13
2. It iaims ito irelease ifirst ioffenders, iafter idue iadmonition ior iwarning iwith iadvice,
iwho iare ialleged ito ihave icommitted ian ioffence ipunishable iunder iSections i379,
i380, i381, i404 ior iSection i420 iof ithe iIndian iPenal iCode iand ialso iin icase iof iany
ioffence ipunishable iwith iimprisonment ifor inot imore ithan itwo iyears, ior iwith ifine,
ior iwith iboth.
i
3. This iAct iempowers ithe iCourt ito irelease icertain ioffenders ion iprobation iof igood
iconduct iif ithe ioffence ialleged ito ihave ibeen icommitted iis inot ipunishable iwith
ideath ior ilife iimprisonment. iHowever, ihe/she ishould ibe ikept iunder isupervision.

4. The iAct iinsists ithat ithe iCourt imay iorder ifor ipayment iby ithe ioffender isuch
icompensation iand ia icost iof ithe iproceedings ias iit ithinks ireasonable ifor iloss ior
iinjury icaused ito ithe ivictim.
5. iThe iAct iprovides ispecial iprotection ito ipersons iunder itwenty-one iyears iof iage
iby inot isentencing ithem ito iimprisonment. iHowever, ithis iprovision iis inot iavailable
ito ia iperson ifound iguilty iof ian ioffence ipunishable iwith ilife iimprisonment.

6. The iAct iprovides ifreedom ito ithe iCourt ito ivary ithe iconditions iof ibond iwhen ian
ioffender iis ireleased ion iprobation iof igood iconduct iand ito iextend ithe iperiod iof
iprobation inot ito iexceed ithree iyears ifrom ithe idate iof ioriginal iorder.

7. The iAct iempowers ithe iCourt ito iissue ia iwarrant iof iarrest ior isummons ito ithe
ioffender iand ihis isureties irequiring ithem ito iattend ithe iCourt ion ithe idate iand
itime ispecified iin ithe isummons iif ian ioffender ireleased ion iprobation iof igood
iconduct ifails ito iobserve ithe iconditions iof ibond.

8. The iAct iempowers ithe iCourt ito itry iand isentence ithe ioffender ito iimprisonment
iunder ithe iprovisions iof ithis iAct. iSuch iorder imay ialso ibe imade iby ithe iHigh
iCourt ior iany iother iCourt iwhen ithe icase icomes ibefore iit ion iappeal ior iin
irevision.
ii
9. The iAct iprovides ian iimportant irole ito ithe iprobation iofficers ito ihelp ithe iCourt
iand ito isupervise ithe iprobationers iput iunder ihim iand ito iadvise iand iassist ithem
ito iget isuitable iemployment.

10. The iAct iextends ito ithe iwhole iof iIndia iexcept ithe iState iof iJammu iand iKashmir.
iThis iAct icomes iinto iforce iin ia iState ion isuch idate ias ithe iState iGovernment
imay, iby inotification iin ithe iOfficial iGazette, iappoint. iIt ialso iprovides iliberty ito
iState iGovernments ito ibring ithe iAct iinto iforce ion idifferent idates iin idifferent
iparts iof ithat iState

14
Under iCriminal iprocedure icode
4
Section i562 iof ithe iCode iof iCriminal iProcedure,1898, iwas ithe iearliest iprovision ito ihave
idealt iwith iprobation. iAfter iamendment iin i1974 iit istands ias iS.360 iof iThe iCode iof
iCriminal iProcedure, i1974. iS.361 imakes iit imandatory ifor ithe ijudge ito ideclare ithe
ireasons ifor inot iawarding ithe ibenefit iof iprobation.

360. iOrder ito irelease ion iprobation iof igood iconduct ior iafter
iadmonition.-

When iany iperson inot iunder itwenty-one iyears iof iage iis iconvicted iof ian ioffence
ipunishable iwith ifine ionly ior iwith iimprisonment ifor ia iterm iof iseven iyears ior iless, ior
iwhen iany iperson iunder itwenty-one iyears iof iage ior iany iwoman iis iconvicted iof ian
ioffence inot ipunishable iwith ideath ior iimprisonment ifor ilife, iand ino iprevious iconviction
iis iproved iagainst ithe ioffender, iif iit iappears ito ithe iCourt ibefore iwhich ihe iis iconvicted,
iregard ibeing ihad ito ithe iage, icharacter ior iantecedents iof ithe ioffender, iand ito ithe
icircumstances iin iwhich ithe ioffence iwas icommitted, ithat iit iis iexpedient ithat ithe
ioffender ishould ibe ireleased ion iprobation iof igood iconduct, ithe iCourt imay, iinstead iof
isentencing ihim iat ionce ito iany ipunishment, idirect ithat ihe ibe ireleased ion ihis ientering
iinto ia ibond, iwith ior iwithout isureties, ito iappear iand ireceive isentence iwhen icalled iupon
iduring isuch iperiod i(not iexceeding ithree iyears) ias ithe iCourt imay idirect iand iin ithe
imeantime ito ikeep ithe ipeace iand ibe iof igood ibehavior:

Object iof iSection i360

Section i360 iis iintended ito ibe iused ito iprevent iyoung ipersons ifrom ibeing icommitted ito
ijail, iwhere ithey imay iassociate iwith ihardened icriminals, iwho imay ilead ithem ifurther
ialong ithe ipath iof icrime, iand ito ihelp ieven imen iof imore imature iyears iwho ifor ithe ifirst
itime imay ihave icommitted icrimes ithrough iignorance, ior iinadvertence ior ithe ibad
iinfluence iof iothers iand iwho, ibut ifor isuch ilapses, imight ibe iexpected ito ibe igood
icitizens. iIt iis inot iintended ithat ithis isection ishould ibe iapplied ito iexperienced imen iof
ithe iworld iwho ideliberately iflout ithe ilaw iand icommit ioffences.

In iJugal iKishore iPrasad iv. iState iof iBihar 1972 AIR 2522, 1973 SCR (1)
875.

iThe iSupreme iCourt iexplained ithe irationale iof ithe iprovision:

4
iR.V. ikelkar’s iLectures ion iCriminal iprocedure, ik,N iChandra isekharan ipillai i6th iEdn, i2017.

15
“The iobject iof ithe iprovision iis ito iprevent ithe iconversion iof iyouthful ioffenders iinto
iobdurate icriminals ias ia iresult iof itheir iassociation iwith ihardened icriminals iof imature
iage iin icase ithe iyouthful ioffenders iare isentenced ito iundergo iimprisonment iin ijail.”

Admonition i& iProbation:

iFirstly, ithe iAct iintroduces itwo imethods ifor irelease iwith idifferent itreatment ifor ifirst
itime ipetty iand iother iserious ior irepeat ioffenders i– i(1) iAdmonition iand i(2) iProbation.

Method i1 i– iAdmonition ifor ifirst itime ipetty ioffenders. i

5
The iSection i3 iof ithe iAct ideals iprimarily iwith ithe itreatment iof ifirst-time ipetty
ioffenders ifound iguilty iof icertain ispecified ioffences ior ioffences ipunishable iwith inot
imore ithan itwo iyears iof iimprisonment. iIt iprovides ifor irelease iof isuch ioffenders iafter
idue iadmonition. i

What iis iadmonition iand iwhen iis iit igiven? i

An iadmonition iis ilike ia iscolding iand iis igiven ito ia ifirst itime ioffender ibefore ireleasing
ihim iand ialways iaccompanied iwith ia iverbal idirection iby ithe imagistrate inot ito irepeat
iany ioffence iin ifuture. iIt iis ithe iduty iof ithe imagistrate ias iwell ias iof ithe ilegal icounsel
ito iwarn ithe ifirst itime ioffender ireceiving ithe ibenefit iof iSection i3 ithat ithis idisposition
iwill idebar ihim ifrom iany iconsideration iunder ithis iSection iof ithe iAct iif ihe irepeats ia
icrime. iSince iSection i379, i380, i381, i404, i420 iare isections ithat ispecify iwhere ioffence iis
ismall ibut iquantum iof ipunishment iis imore ithan i2 iyears, ithe iscope iof iSection i3 iis
iwider ithan inormally iassumed ias icovering ioffences iwith itwo iyears iimprisonment.
iFurthermore, ithere iare iother iconsiderations ithat iare itaken iinto iaccount ifor ieligibility
isuch ias iantecedents iof ithe ioffender, icharacter iof ithe ioffender, icircumstances, iand
idamages idone.

Cr. P.C (1973) sections 27 and 27 (2): 27: Any offence not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life, committed by any person who at the date when he appears or is brought
before the Court is under the age of sixteen years, may be tried by the Court of a Chief Judicial
Magistrate, or by any Court specially empowered under the Children Act, 1960 (60 of 1960), or

5
iThe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958, ip. i3.

16
any other law for the time being in force providing for the treatment, training and rehabilitation
of youthful offenders. (2): Any offence punishable only with fine not exceeding one thousand
rupees, but does not include any offence so punishable under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (4 of
1939), or under any other law which provides for convicting the accused person in his absence
on a plea of guilt.

6
Keshav iSitaram iSali iv. iState iof iMaharashtra i(1983) i

Facts:

The ioffender iwas iaccused iof istealing icoal ifrom ithe irailway igoods iwagon iand ithe iHigh
iCourt iof iBombay iallowed ithe iappeal iand iconvicted ithe iappellant iof ian ioffence
ipunishable iunder iSection i379 iread iwith iSection i109 iIndian iPenal iCode. i

Interpretation&Judgment:

The icourt iimposed ia isentence iof ifine iof iRs. i500 ion ithe iappellant iand iin idefault iof
ipayment iof ifine ito isuffer irigorous iimprisonment ifor itwo imonths. iHowever iin ithe icase
iof iMr. iShri iS. iV. iTambwekar, iLearned icounsel ifor ithe iappellant, iat ithe ihearing iof
ithis iappeal iconfined ihis iargument ito ithe iquestion iwhether ithe iappellant ishould ibe idealt
iwith ieither iunder iSection i360 iof ithe iCr.P.C. ior iSections i3 iand i4 iof ithe iProbation iof
iOffenders iAct, i1958.The icourt iadhered ito ithe ispecial icircumstances iof ithis icase iand
ideclared ithat ithe icase ishould ihave ibeen igiven ithe ibenefit iof ieither iSection i360 iof ithe
iCr.P.C. ior iSection i3 iand i4 iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct ito ithe iappellant iinstead
iof iimposing ia isentence iof ifine ion ihim. iThe ifinal idecision iof ithe icourt iwas ito iset
iaside ithe isentence iimposed iupon ithe iappellant iand iremit ithe icase ito ithe iTrial iCourt ito
ipass ian iappropriate iorder iunder ieither iof ithe itwo iprovisions ireferred iabove. iThe ifine
iwhich ihas ialready ibeen ipaid iby ithe iappellant ishall ibe irefunded ito ihim.

7
Balwinder ivs iState iOf iHaryana i(2012)

6
iAIR i1983 iSC i291, i1983 iCriLJ i436, i1983 i(1) iSCALE i704, i(1983) i1 iSCC i390
7
iCriminal iAppeal iNo. i2920 iSB iof i2010 i i

17
Facts:

The ioffender iwas iaccused iof istealing i20 ikgs iof ighee ifor ipublic isale iin ialuminum
icontainer. iHe iwas iconvicted iunder iSection i16(g)(i) iof ithe iPrevention iof iFood
iAdulteration iAct iand iwas isentenced ito iundergo irigorous iimprisonment ifor isix imonths
ialong iwith ithe ifine iof i1000 iRs.

The icounsel ifor ithe ioffender iinformed ithe icourt ithat ithe ioccurrence iin ithis icase ipertains
ito ithe iyear iof i2003.The ioffender ihas ialready isuffered ithe iprotracted itrial ifor iover ia
iperiod iof imore ithan ione idecade.

Interpretation& iJudgment iof iCourt:

Petitioner ihas ialready iundergone ithe isentence ifor iabout itwo imonths iand ino iother icase
iis ipending iagainst ihim iat ithe imoment. iThus, itaking iall icircumstances iinto iconsideration
iit iwas idecided ito irelease ithe ioffender ion iprobation iunder iProbation iof iOffenders iAct.
iThe ifine iwas ihowever ienhanced ito iRs. i5000.

Different itypes iof iprobation

There iare ivarious itypes iof iprobation ithat ican ibe iordered ito ithe ioffender:

1. Supervised iprobation: iThere ilies ia icondition ithat ithe ioffender imust icheck iin
iwith ithe iprobation iofficer iat iregular iintervals iby imails, iphones ior ilike imeans.
2. Unsupervised iProbation: iThe ioffender ihas ifreedom ifrom iprobation iofficer ibut
ithis idoes inot imean ithat ihe iis ifree ifrom icourt ispecified iorders. iSuch iprobation iis
igiven ifor iless iserious ior inon-violent icrimes.
3. Community iControl iProbation: iThe ioffender iunder ithis iprobation iis iconfined ito
ithe iboundaries iof ihome iand ipermitted ijust ito iattend iwork ior ischool. iUnder ithis
ihe iis itraced iby ithe iankle itracking isystem.
4. Shock iProbation: iThe idefendant iunder ithis iis icaptured iin iprison ifor ishort itime
iperiod iin iorder ito i‘shock’ ihim iinto iprobation iconditions.

18
 5. Crime- iSpecific iProbation: iUnder ithis, ijudge iorders ispecific iconditions ito ibe
ifulfilled iin iorder ito iavoid ihappening iof ithe isame icrime iagain.
6. Federal iProbation: iFederal iprobation iis ia isentence ionly ifor ithose iconvicts iwho
ihave icommitted ifederal icrimes. iThey iare iput iunder ithe iguidance iof ifederal
iprobation iofficers ito irehabilitate ithem iin isociety. iFederal icrimes iinclude imail
ifraud, iaircraft ihijacking, icarjacking, ikidnapping, ilynching, ibank irobbery, ichild
ipornography, icredit icard ifraud, iidentity itheft, icomputer icrimes, ifederal ihate
icrimes, ianimal icruelty.

Method i2 i– iProbation ibased irelease. i

8
The iSection i4 i(1) iempowers ithe icourts ito irelease isuch ioffenders iunder iprobation ias
iwell.This imethod iaccounts ifor irelease iof ifirst itime iand irepeat ioffenders, ioffenders iunder
iboth ipetty iand igrievous icharges, ion iprobation iof igood iconduct iand ientering iinto ibond
iwith ior iwithout isureties, iif ithe ioffence icommitted iis inot ipunishable iwith ideath ior
iimprisonment ifor ilife.

Overlapping iJurisdictions iof iSections i3 i& i4: i

It iis ito ibe inoted ithat ithere iis ioverlapping ijurisdiction iof iSection i3 iand iSection i4.
iThose ieligible ifor irelease iunder iSection i3 imay ialso ibe ibrought iunder iSection i4,
isubject ito ithe icircumstances iof ithe icase iincluding ithe inature iof ithe ioffence iand ithe
icharacter iof ithe ioffender. iHowever, ithe iscope iof iSection i4 iis ibroader iand iunlimited,
iexcept ifor ithe itwo iexceptions iof ioffences ipunishable iwith ideath ior iimprisonment ifor
ilife. iIn icontrast ito ithe iSection i3, ithese iprovisions iare iapplicable ito iall ioffenders
iincluding irepeaters iwho ihave icommitted ia icrime ithat iwas inot ipunishable iwith ideath ior
iimprisonment ifor ilife. iSo, ithe ionly iexception ito ieligibility ifor irelease iunder ithis
iprovision iis ioffence ipunishable iby ideath ior ilife iimprisonment. iAll iother ioffences ican
iget iaccommodated ifor iconsideration iof iprobation. iThe iSection ipermits ithe iusage iof
iprobation ifor ioffences iincluding ipetty i(as icited iin ithe icases ibelow) iand iultimately

8
iChapter iXI, iCriminal iManual, iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, iDistrict iCourts iof iMaharashtra, iAccess ion
iMay i21, i2012 ifrom: ihttp://court.mah.nic.in/courtweb/static_pages/page5b.php, ip.2.

19
iencourages iusing ialternatives ito iimprisonment isuch ias iprobation iin icases iwhere ioffence
ihas inot ibeen iserious ior iharmful ito ithe isociety ias ia iwhole. iEntering iinto ia ibond iwith
ior iwithout isureties iThe iSection i4 ialso iindicates ithat ithe ioffender ishould ienter iinto ia
ibond iand ihe imay ialso ibe irequired ito igive isureties. i‘It iwould inormally ibe iadvisable ito
itake isureties iin iaddition ito ipersonal ibonds, ias isureties iare ithemselves ia iguarantee iof
isome isupervisory iefforts itowards ireform iand ia isafeguard iagainst ithe ioffender iremoving
ihimself ioutside ithe ijurisdiction iand ibreaking ithe iconditions iof ithe ibond’.

Entering iinto ia ibond iwith ior iwithout isureties

iThe iSection i4 ialso iindicates ithat ithe ioffender ishould ienter iinto ia ibond iand ihe imay
ialso ibe irequired ito igive isureties. i‘It iwould inormally ibe iadvisable ito itake isureties iin
iaddition ito ipersonal ibonds, ias isureties iare ithemselves ia iguarantee iof isome isupervisory
iefforts itowards ireform iand ia isafeguard iagainst ithe ioffender iremoving ihimself ioutside
ithe ijurisdiction iand ibreaking ithe iconditions iof ithe ibond. iHowever, iin icases iwhere ithe
iperson imay ibe itoo ipoor ito ihave isureties, iit imay ibe iconsidered ito irelease ion ipersonal
ibond iwithout isureties ias ipermitted iunder iboth iSection i4 iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders
iAct iand ithe iSection i360 iof ithe iCr.P.C. iwith iall iprecautions iof isupervision.

9
Secondly, ithe iAct iempowers ithe icourt iunder iSection i4 i(2) ito iconsider ireport, iif iany,
iof ithe iProbation iOfficer ibefore imaking ithe ijudgement iof ithe icase iconcerned. i75 iIt
ishould ibe ikept iin imind, ithat ineither iunder ithe inew iJJ iAct, inor ithe iProbation iof
iOffenders iAct iis ithe ireference ito ithe iSocial iInvestigation iReport icalled ifor iby ithe
imagistrate ia imatter iof idiscretion. iSub-section i2 iof iSection i6 iof ithe iProbation iof
iOffenders iAct iwhich ithe imagistrate irefers ito idetermine iwhether ioffender iis ito ibe idealt
iwith iunder iSection i3 ior iSection i4 iof ithe iAct iuses ithe iwords i“‘shall’ icall ifor ia ireport
ifrom ithe iProbation iOfficer”. iUnder ithe iSection i4 i(3) ithe icourt iis ialso ientitled ito imake
ia isupervision iorder iand idirect iadditional iconditions ito ibe iinserted iin ithe ibond ito ibe
ientered iinto iby ithe ioffender iunder iSection i4 i(1). i‘The iterms iand iconditions iof ithe
isupervision iorder ishall ibe iexplained ito ithe ioffenders iand ione icopy iof ithe isupervision
iorder ishall ibe ifurnished iforthwith ito ieach iof ithe ioffenders, ithe isureties, iif iany, iand ithe

9
iThe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958, ip. i4.

20
iProbation iOfficer iconcerned’.In ifact, iin isuitable icases, ithe ioffender imight ibe idirected
iunder iSection i5 ito ipay icompensation iand icost iof iproceedings ito ithe iperson ito iwhom
ihe icaused iloss ior iinjury. iThe iSection i6 iplaces irestrictions ion ithe iCourt’s ipower ito
iimprison ioffenders iwho iare ibelow itwenty-one iyears iof iage. iThese iprovisions iare ifurther
ielaborated iin ithe ichapter ion ithe ipowers iof ithe iMagistrate. iFurthermore, ithe iAct ilays
idown ithe iroles iof ithe iProbation iOfficer iin iSections i13 iand i14. iOne iof ithe imost
iimportant iduties iof ithe iPO ienshrined iin ithe iAct iis ithe ipre-sentence ireport iwhich ihe
iprovides ito ithe icourt ibefore idecision iis imade iregarding ioffender’s icase. iThe iPO iis ialso
ientitled ito iconduct iresearch iand iinteract iwith ithe ioffender iand ihis ifamily iin iorder ito
iunderstand ihis ibackground, iprofile iand iassess iwhether ihe/she iis isuitable ifor irelease ion
iprobation. iThe ilater iparts iof ithis ipaper ilook iinto imore idetail iof isuch iprovisions iand
iexplain ithe isignificance iof ithe iPO’s irole iin iimplementing iprobation ilaw

10
Moti iLal iBairwa ivs iState iOf iRajasthan i(1986) i

Facts: i

The iaccused ipetitioner ihas ibeen ifound iguilty ifor ian ioffence iunder iSection i295 iIPC.The
ioffender idamaged ithe ideity iof iShankerji iby ithrowing ia istone iat iit iwhich iresulted iin
idefiling ithe iplace iof iworship iand iinsulting ia ireligion iof ipeople iwho iworship ithe iplace.
ithe ioffender ihas ibeen iaccused iunder ithe isection i29511 iof ithe iIPC. iThe ioffence iunder
iSection i295 iIPC iis ipunishable iwith iimprisonment iwhich imay iextend ito itwo iyears ior
iwith ifine ior iwith iboth. i

Interpretation i& ijudgment iof iCourt: i

The ioffence iis itherefore isuch ithat icould ihave ibeen idealt iwith iunder iSection i4 iof ithe
iProbation iof iOffenders iAct ior iSection i360 iCr. iPC. iAt ithe itime iof iconviction ithe
ioffender iwas i18 iyears iof iage iand ithere iwas ino iprevious iconviction ion irecord iagainst
ithe iaccused-petitioner. iTherefore, iin ia icase iwhere ithe iaccused iis iless ithan i21 iyears iof
iage iand iis iconvicted ifor ian ioffence iwhich iis inot ipunishable iwith iimprisonment ifor ilife,

10
i1986 i(1) iWLN i287.
11
iUniversal iCriminal iManual, iIndian iPenal iCode, i1860, ip. i504.

21
iit iis ithe imandate iof ilaw ithat ithe icase iof ithe iaccused ishould ibe idealt iwith iunder ithe
iprovisions icontained iin ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct ias iwell ias iSection i360 iCr. iPC.
iHowever, ithe iaccused- ipetitioner ihas ibeen isentenced ito iimprisonment iand iit ican ibe
iclaimed ithat ithe icourt ihas icommitted iillegality. iIt iis iimportant ito idraw iattention ito ithe
iSection i6 iof ithe iAct iwhich iplaces irestriction ito ithe ipower iof ithe icourt ito isentence ia
ijuvenile ifor iimprisonment iwhen ihe iis ifound iguilty iof ihaving icommitted ian ioffence
ipunishable iwith iimprisonment, ibut inot iwith iimprisonment ifor ilife, iunless iit iis isatisfied
ithat ihaving iregard ito ithe icircumstances iof ithe icase iincluding ithe inature iof ithe ioffence
iand ithe icharacter iof ithe ioffender, iit iwould inot ibe idesirable ito ideal iwith ihim iunder
iSection i3 ior iSection i4, iand iif ithe icourt ipasses iany isentence iof iimprisonment ion ithe
ioffender, iit ishall irecord iits ireasons ifor idoing iso. iAdditionally, ithe isub-section i2 iof
iSection i6 iof ithe iAct iprovides ithat ifor ithe ipurpose iof isatisfying iitself iwhether iit iwould
inot ibe idesirable ito ideal iunder iSection i3 ior i4 iwith ian ioffender ireferred ito iin iSub-
section i(1) iof iSection i6, ithe icourt ishall icall ifor ia ireport ifrom ithe iProbation iOfficer
iand iconsider ithe ireport iif iany iand iany iother iinformation iavailable ito iit irelating ito ithe
icharacter iand iphysical iand imental icondition iof ithe ioffender.As iindicated iby iM.B.
iSharma, ithe icourt iin ithe iMoti iLal iBairwa icase idoes inot iappear ito ihave iconsidered.
iThese iaspects iof ithe iAct iand iclearly imade iill idecision iregarding ithe ijudgment iof ia
ijuvenile.According ito iMr. iSharma, ithe icourt icould ihave ipassed ian iorder ito irelease ithe
ioffender ion iprobation iof igood iconduct ion ifurnishing ia ibond iin ithe isum iof iRs. i2000/-
iwith ione isurety iin ithe ilike iamount ifor ia iperiod iof i6 imonths ito ithe isatisfaction iof ithe
itrial icourt, iinstead iof isentencing ihim ito iimprisonment.

12
Meruva iSatyanarayana ivs iState iOf iAndhra iPradesh i(1995) i

Facts:

The ioffender iwas iconvicted iunder iSection i36(a), i(b) iand i(c) iof iA.P. iExcise iAct i68
iread iwith irules i19, i54 iand i55 iof iA.P. iForeign iLiquor iand iIndian iLiquor iRules, i1970
iand isentenced ifor iimprisonment ifor i6 imonths ialong iwith ithe ifine iof i100 iRs.69 iThe
iCounsel iindicated ithat ithe ioffender iis ientitled ito ibe igiven ithe ibenefit iof ithe iprovisions

12
i1996 i(1) iALD i130, i1996 i(1) iALD iCri i394, i1996 i(1) iALT iCri i348, i1996 iCriLJ i1475

22
iof iSection i4(1) iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct i58, iin iview iof ithe ifact ithat ithe
ioffence iis iof ihighly itechnical inature.The iSection i4(1) iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct
irequires iascertaining iif ithe ioffender iis iof ia igood icharacter iand iconduct iin iorder ito
irelease ihim ion iprobation. i

Interpretation& ijudgment iof iCourt:

However, at the consideration of the case before the Trial Court the Magistrate initially refused
to give the benefits of the Act to the offender concerned on the grounds that he crossed the age of
30, hence the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act or Section 360 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure are not applicable. Such reasoning is rather inadequate because the Act does not
indicate the age limit when the offender can benefit from the Act or not, especially when the
offence committed prescribes minimum sentence of imprisonment and thus can be released on
probation if he possesses good character. Ultimately it was decided to remand the case for
revision and file it to the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, directing him
to restore Crl. Appeal No. 66 of 1990 and to consider the release of offender on probation under
the section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act.

Powers iand iObligations iunder ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958:
iThe iMagistrate

This isection iidentifies ithe irole iof ithe iMagistrate ilaid idown iin ithe iProbation iof
iOffenders iAct. iIt ialso idraws iattention ito iother idocuments isuch ias iJuvenile iJustice iAct,
iModel iPrisons iManual iand ithe iMulla iCommittee iReport iwhich ifurther ielaborate ithe
iroles iand iduties iof ithe iMagistrate. iConsidering ireport iof iPO iand ipassing ia
isupervision iorder: i

What iare ithe ipowers iof ithe icourt ito ipass isupervision iorders? i
13
The isection i4 i(2) ipermits ithe icourt ibefore imaking iany iorder ito iconsider ithe ireport, iif
iany, iof ithe iprobation iofficer iconcerned iin irelation ito ithe icase. iIn iaddition ito ithis, ithe
icourt iunder ithe isection i4 i(3) iis iempowered ito imake ia isupervision iorder iand idirect

13
iChapter iXI, iCriminal iManual, iProbation iof iOffenders iAct,

23
iadditional iconditions ito ibe iinserted iin ithe ibond ito ibe ientered iinto iby ithe ioffender
iunder iSection i4 i(1). iWhen ian iorder iunder isub-section i(1) iis imade, ithe icourt imay, iif iit
iis iof iopinion ithat iin ithe iinterests iof ithe ioffender iand iof ithe ipublic iit iis iexpedient iso
ito ido, iin iaddition ipass ia isupervision iorder idirecting ithat ithe ioffender ishall iremain
iunder ithe isupervision iof ia iprobation iofficer inamed iin ithe iorder iduring isuch iperiod, inot
ibeing iless ithan ione iyear, ias imay ibe ispecified itherein, iand imay iin isuch isupervision
iorder, iimpose isuch iconditions ias iit ideems inecessary ifor ithe idue isupervision iof ithe
ioffender. iSome iother iconditions iwhich imust ibe ifollowed iby ithe ioffender ihave ibeen
istated iin ithe isection i4(4): iThe icourt imaking ia isupervision iorder iunder isub-section i(3)
ishall irequire ithe ioffender, ibefore ihe iis ireleased, ito ienter iinto ia ibond, iwith ior iwithout
isureties, ito iobserve ithe iconditions ispecified iin isuch iorder iand isuch iadditional iconditions
iwith irespect ito iresidence, iabstention ifrom iintoxicants ior iany iother imatter ias ithe icourt
imay, ihaving iregard ito ithe iparticular icircumstances, iconsider ifit ito iimpose ifor ipreventing
ia irepetition iof ithe isame ioffence ior ia icommission iof iother ioffences iby ithe ioffender. i

Providing igrounds ito iuse ithe iAct iin ithe icase iof iyoung ioffenders i(18-
21):

iIn ithe icontext iof ithe iJuvenile iJustice iAct i(JJA) ihaving icome iinto iforce ias ia iseparate
ilaw ifor idealing iwith ijuveniles iin iconflict iwith ilaw, ithe imagistrate imust itake iinto
iaccount iSection i15 iof ithe iJuvenile iJustice iAct iwhich istates ithat iall ipersons ibelow i18
iyears iof iage iand iin iconflict iwith ilaw ishall ibe idealt iunder ithe iprovisions iof ithe iJJ
iAct. iSo ioffenders iunder ithe iage iof i18 iwould ino ilonger ibe iadministered iby ithe
iProbation iof iOffenders iAct. iThey ishall ibe idealt iwith iunder ithe iJuvenile iJustice iAct ibut
ishall istill iinvolve iand iengage ithe iservices iof iProbation iOfficers ifor ithe isupervision iof
ithese ioffenders. iHowever, iyoung ioffenders, ifalling iwithin ithe iage igroup iof i18 iand i21
iare idirectly ieligible ito ibe iconsidered iunder ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct. iThe iSection
i6 iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct ifocuses ion irestriction ion iimprisonment iof
ioffenders ibelow ithe iage iof i21. iThis ishould ibe ire-interpreted iin ithe icontext iof ithe iJJ
iAct ihaving icome iinto iforce ito iread i‘as iany iperson iabove i18 iyears ibut iless ithan i21
iyears’.

24
14 iThe iobjective iof ithis isection iis ito iensure ithat iyoung ioffenders iare inot isent ito ijail
ifor ioffences ithat iare inot iserious iand iprevent ithem ifrom ia icontact iwith ihardened iand
ihabitual icriminals iof ithe ijail. i(1) iWhen iany iperson iunder itwenty-one iyears iof iage iis
ifound iguilty iof ihaving icommitted ian ioffence ipunishable iwith iimprisonment i(but inot
iwith iimprisonment ifor ilife), ithe icourt iby iwhich ithe iperson iis ifound iguilty ishall inot
isentence ihim ito iimprisonment iunless iit iis isatisfied ithat, ihaving iregard ito ithe
icircumstances iof ithe icase iincluding ithe inature iof ithe ioffence iand ithe icharacter iof ithe
ioffender, iit iwould inot ibe idesirable ito ideal iwith ihim iunder isection i3 ior isection i4, iand
iif ithe icourt ipasses iany isentence iof iimprisonment ion ithe ioffender, iit ishall irecord iits
ireasons ifor idoing iso.

(2) iFor ithe ipurpose iof isatisfying iitself iwhether iit iwould inot ibe idesirable ito ideal iunder
isection i3 ior isection i4 iwith ian ioffender ireferred ito iin isub-section i(1) ithe icourt ishall
icall ifor ia ireport ifrom ithe iprobation iofficer iand iconsider ithe ireport, iif iany, iand iany
iother iinformation iavailable ito iit irelating ito ithe icharacter iand iphysical iand imental
icondition iof ithe ioffender.

15
Kamroonissa ivs. iState iof iMaharashtra i(1973)

Facts:

iThe ioffender iwas iaccused iof istealing ia igold inecklace iand iwas iconvicted iunder ithe
isection i379 iof ithe iIndian iPenal iCode. iHe iwas isentenced ito isuffer irigorous
iimprisonment iof i18 imonths iand ipay ithe ifine iof i500 iRs. iThe iappellant isubmitted ian
iappeal iregarding ithe ijudgment ibut ithe iHigh iCourt iof iBombay idismissed ithe iappeal.

iThe icourt ialso icalled ifor ia ireport iof ithe iProbation iOfficer iwho istated ithat ithe
iappellant iwas iless ithan i21 iyears iof iage ion ithe idate iof iconviction iand iought ito ibe
igiven ithe ibenefits iof ithe isection i6 iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct. iThe ireport iof
ithe iProbation iOfficer ishowed ithat ithe ioffender iwas iarrested iin i1971 iwhile imoving iin
ilocal itrain iin isuspicious icircumstances ibut ishe iwas ireleased ion ibond iof igood ibehavior
iin ithe isum iof i100 iRs. iThereafter, ishe iwas itried iunder ithe isection i379 iof ithe iIndian

14
i iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958, ip. i7
15
iManupatra, iMANU/SC/0153/1974, iSupreme iCourt iof iIndia

25
iPenal iCode iin iconnection iwith ian iincident idated ion iMarch i5, i1973 ibut iultimately ishe
iwas iacquitted. iThe iappellant ihas icommitted isimilar ithefts iat iseveral itimes ibut ithose
iwere iundetected.

Interpretation i& ijudgment iof iCourt: i

The court’s decision to imprison the offender rather than give the benefit of the section 6 of the
Act was based on the ground that it is not a proper case to for applying provisions of section six
and additionally provided list of reasons at the paragraph 21 of his judgment indicating his
ultimate decision regarding the case.

Can ithe icourt ichange iits idecision ion iduration iand iconditions iof ithe
ibond?

Under iSection i8 iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct ithe icourt iis iempowered ito ichange
iits ioriginal idecision iregarding iduration iand iconditions iof ithe ibond iduring ithe iperiod
ithat ithe ibond iis ieffective. iThe isection ipermits icourts ito ivary itheir ioriginal iorders
iregarding ithe ibond, ito ithe iextent iof idischarging ithe ibond ior iextending ithe iperiod iof
ithe ibond inot iexceeding i3 iyears, idepending ion ithe iconduct iof ithe iprobationer ias
iaccounted iby ithe iapplication iof ithe iProbation iOfficer. iIn ithe icase iof ia ijuvenile
ioffender iit iis ithe iprinciple iof ibest iinterest iof ithe ichild ias iunder ithe iJuvenile iJustice
iAct ithat ishould iguide ithe imagistrates. i(1) iIf, ion ithe iapplication iof ia iprobation iofficer,
iany icourt iis iof iopinion ithat iin ithe iinterests iof ithe ioffender iand ithe ipublic iit iis
iexpedient ior inecessary ito ivary ithe iconditions iof iany ibond ientered iinto iby ithe ioffender,
iit imay, iat iany itime iduring ithe iperiod iwhen ithe ibond iis ieffective, ivary ithe ibond iby
iextending ior idiminishing ithe iduration ithereof iso, ihowever, ithat iit ishall inot iexceed ithree
iyears ifrom ithe idate iof ithe ioriginal iorder ior iby ialtering ithe iconditions ithereof ior iby
iinserting iadditional iconditions itherein;91 iProvided ithat ino isuch ivariation ishall ibe imade
iwithout igiving ithe ioffender iand ithe isurety ior isureties imentioned iin ithe ibond ian
iopportunity iof ibeing iheard.(2) iIf iany isurety irefuses ito iconsent ito iany ivariation
iproposed ito ibe imade iunder isub-section i(1), ithe icourt imay irequire ithe ioffender ito ienter
iinto ia ifresh ibond iand iif ithe ioffender irefuses ior ifails ito ido iso, ithe icourt imay isentence
ihim ifor ithe ioffence iof iwhich ihe iwas ifound iguilty. i(3) iNotwithstanding ianything

26
ihereinbefore icontained, ithe icourt iwhich ipasses ian iorder iunder iSection i4 iin irespect iof
ian ioffender imay, iif iit iis isatisfied ion ian iapplication imade iby ithe iprobation iofficer, ithat
ithe iconduct iof ithe ioffender ihas ibeen isuch ias ito imake iit iunnecessary ithat ihe ishould ibe
ikept iany ilonger iunder isupervision, idischarge ithe ibond ior ibonds ientered iinto iby ihim.

iWhat ihappens iif ithe ioffender ibreaks ithe ibond?

i16If ithe ioffender ifails ito ifollow ithe iconditions istated iby ithe iCourt, ia isentence isuitable
ifor ithe ioriginal ioffence imay ibe iimposed ion ihim ior ia ifine. iThese iprovisions iare
ioutlined iin iSection i9 iof ithe iAct. i(1) iIf ithe icourt iwhich ipasses ian iorder iunder iSection
i4 iin irespect iof ian ioffender ior iany icourt iwhich icould ihave idealt iwith ithe ioffender iin
irespect iof ihis ioriginal ioffence ihas ireason ito ibelieve, ion ithe ireport iof ia iprobation
iofficer ior iotherwise, ithat ithe ioffender ihas ifailed ito iobserve iany iof ithe iconditions iof
ithe ibond ior ibonds ientered iinto iby ihim, iit imay iissue ia iwarrant ifor ihis iarrest ior imay,
iif iit ithinks ifit, iissue ia isummons ito ihim iand ihis isureties, iif iany, irequiring ihim ior ithem
ito iattend ibefore iit iat isuch itime ias imay ibe ispecified iin ithe isummons. i(2) iThe icourt
ibefore iwhich ian ioffender iis iso ibrought ior iappears imay ieither iremand ihim ito icustody
iuntil ithe icase iis iconcluded ior iit imay igrant ihim ibail, iwith ior iwithout isurety, ito iappear
ion ithe idate iwhich iit imay ifix ifor ihearing.(3) iIf ithe icourt, iafter ihearing ithe icase, iis
isatisfied ithat ithe ioffender ihas ifailed ito iobserve iany iof ithe iconditions iof ithe ibond ior
ibonds ientered iinto iby ihim, iit imay iforthwith i(a) iSentence ihim ifor ithe ioriginal ioffence;
ior i(b) iWhere ithe ifailure iis ifor ithe ifirst itime, ithen, iwithout iprejudice ito ithe icontinuance
iin iforce iof ithe ibond, iimpose iupon ihim ia ipenalty inot iexceeding ififty irupees. i(4) iIf ia
ipenalty iimposed iunder iclause i(b) iof isub-section i(3) iis inot ipaid iwithin isuch iperiod ias
ithe icourt imay ifix, ithe icourt imay isentence ithe ioffender ifor ithe ioriginal ioffence. i

Juvenile iJustice iAct, i2000 iThe iJJ iBoard iand iReview iof iCases i

What iis ithe icontext iand iprovision ifor iprobation iunder ithe iJJA? i

16
iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958, ip. i10.

27
17
The iJJA iprovides ia iseparate isystem iof ijustice-dispensation ifor iinstances iwhere ichildren
iare iaccused iof icommitting ioffences. iThe iAct iprovides ifor icare, iprotection, itreatment
iand irehabilitation ifor idelinquent iand ineglected ijuveniles iand i‘makes ithe ijuvenile ijustice
isystem imore iresponsive ito ithe idevelopmental ineeds iof ithe ijuvenile’. iUnder ithe iJJA, ia
ijuvenile iis ibrought ibefore ia iJuvenile iJustice iBoard i(JJB) irather ithan ia iMagistrate ior
iJudge. iUnlike ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, ithe iJJA idoes inot iprovide ifor isentencing
ia ijuvenile ion ibeing ifound iguilty iof ian ioffence. iInstead, iit irequires ipassing ia ifinal
iorder iwhen ithe iJJB ifinds ithat ia ijuvenile ihas icommitted ian ioffence. iThe iAct irefers ito
ithe ioffender ias ia ijuvenile iin iconflict iwith ilaw irather ithan iaccused ior iconvicted. iThe
iAct idoes inot icall ifor iimprisonment iof ia ijuvenile; iinstead iit i‘contemplates iadvising ithe
ijuvenile iand icounseling iparents, iurging ithe iparticipation iin icommunity iservice ior
ireleasing ithe ijuvenile ion iprobation iof igood iconduct irather ithan isending ihim ito iSpecial
iHome ifor ithree iyears. iIn ishort, ithe iAct iprovides ian iopportunity ifor ithe ijuvenile iin
iconflict iwith ilaw ito iavoid iincarceration iand ipsychological istigma iand inot ito ibe iviewed
ias ia icriminal.The iAct ialso istates ithe ieffective iinvolvement iof iinformal isocial
iarrangements iat ithe ilevel iof ithe ifamily, ivoluntary iorganizations iand ithe icommunity. iIn
iparticular, ithe iAct istates ithat ia iMagistrate iis ia imember iof ithe iJuvenile iJustice iBoard
i(JJB). iIt iis ia iunique ibody iwhich iexercises ipowers iin iregards ito ijuveniles iwho
icommitted ia icrime. iThe iAct istates ithat: i(1) iNotwithstanding ianything icontained iin ithe
iCode iof iCriminal iProcedure, i1973 i(2 iof i1974), ithe iState iGovernment imay, iby
inotification iin ithe iOfficial iGazette, iconstitute ifor ia idistrict ior ia igroup iof idistricts
ispecified iin ithe inotification, ione ior imore iJuvenile iJustice iBoards ifor iexercising ithe
ipowers iand idischarging ithe iduties iconferred ior iimposed ion isuch iBoards iin irelation ito
ijuveniles iin iconflict iwith ilaw iunder ithis iAct.

(2) iA iBoard ishall iconsist iof ia iMetropolitan iMagistrate ior ia iJudicial iMagistrate iof ithe
ifirst iclass, ias ithe icase imay ibe, iand itwo isocial iworkers iof iwhom iat ileast ione ishall ibe
ia iwoman, iforming ia iBench iand ievery isuch iBench ishall ihave ithe ipowers iconferred iby
ithe iCode iof iCriminal iProcedure, i1973 i(2 iof i1974), ion ia iMetropolitan iMagistrate ior, ias

17
iV. iHansaria iand iP.I. iJose, iJuvenile iJustice iSystem: iWorking iManual ifor iStake iHolders, i2008, ip.1.

28
ithe icase imay ibe, ia iJudicial iMagistrate iof ithe ifirst iclass iand ithe iMagistrate ion ithe
iBoard ishall ibe idesignated ias ithe iprincipal iMagistrate.

i(3) iNo iMagistrate ishall ibe iappointed ias ia imember iof ithe iBoard iunless ihe ihas ispecial
iknowledge ior itraining iin ichild ipsychology ior ichild iwelfare iand ino isocial iworker ishall
ibe iappointed ias ia imember iof ithe iBoard iunless ihe ihas ibeen iactively iinvolved iin ihealth
ieducation, ior iwelfare iactivities ipertaining ito ichildren ifor iat ileast iseven iyears.
iAdditionally, ithe iBoard iis iempowered ito ido ithe ifollowing: i(1) iWhere ia iBoard ihas
ibeen iconstituted ifor iany idistrict ior ia igroup iof idistricts, isuch iBoard ishall,
inotwithstanding ianything icontained iin iany iother ilaw ifor ithe itime ibeing iin iforce ibut
isave ias iotherwise iexpressly iprovided iin ithis iAct, ihave ipower ito ideal iexclusively iwith
iall iproceedings iunder ithis iAct irelating ito ijuvenile iin iconflict iwith ilaw.(2) iThe ipowers
iconferred ion ithe iBoard iby ior iunder ithis iAct imay ialso ibe iexercised iby ithe iHigh iCourt
iand ithe iCourt iof iSession, iwhen ithe iproceeding icomes ibefore ithem iin iappeal, irevision
ior iotherwise.

The iJJA iAct, iunlike ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, idraws ithe ifocus imainly ion ithe
ipowers iof ithe iMagistrate iand ithe iJJB iwhich iis iempowered ito ireview ijuvenile icases
iand ipass ijudgements iaccordingly. iThe istrength iof isuch ian iAct ican ibe iseen iin iits
iobjective ito idraw ia istrong iline iof idistinction ibetween ia ijuvenile ioffender iand ian iadult
iconvict iwho imight ihave iboth icommitted ia iserious ioffence. iThe iJJA icomplements ithe
iProbation iof iOffenders iAct iby iemphasizing ithat ireformatory ior iother ialternatives ito
iimprisonment iought ito ibe iapplied ifor ipetty ioffences iand ijuvenile icases.

Model iPrisons iManual, i2003 i

What idoes ithe iModel iPrison iManual isay iregarding ithe irole iof icourts ivis-à-vis
iyoung ioffenders? i

18
The iManual idoes inot ispecifically isingle iout ithe iduties iof ithe iMagistrate ias ithe iabove
iActs ido. iHowever, iit imentions ithe irole iof ithe icourts iregarding ithe itreatment iof iyoung
ioffenders ias iwell ias istresses ithe iimportance iof ipre-sentence ireport ito ibe iprovided ito

18
iModel iPrison iManual, iBureau iof iPolice iResearch iand iDevelopment, iMinistry iof iHome iAffairs, i2003,
ip. i287.

29
ithe icourts iprior ithe ijudgment. iNo imention iis ihowever igiven iregarding iwhose
iresponsibility iit iis ito iprovide isuch ireport iand ihow iit iis ito ibe iprocessed. i

Courts ifor iYoung iOffenders i

The Manual also suggests, “Courts to be known as ‘Courts for young offenders’ exercising the
powers, and discharging the duties conferred on such courts, in relation to the trial and
commitment of young offenders between 18-21 years of age, should be set up for specified areas
according to requirements in each State/Union Territory. Before making any order, the court
should take into account the pre-sentence investigation report of the probation officer. This
report should be a statutory requirement for deciding the cases of young offenders”.

Pre-Sentence iInvestigation iReport i

Pre-sentence iinvestigation ireport ishould iinclude iinformation iabout ithe isocial, ieconomic
iand ipsychological ibackground iof ithe ioffender iso ias ito iidentify ithe isequence iof ihis
icriminal ibehavior. iIt ishould ialso iseek ito idetermine ithe idegree iof ithe iyoung ioffender’s
iinvolvement iin ivice iand icrime. iThis ireport ishould iattempt ia iprognosis iin iregard ito ithe
iyoung ioffender’s iresettlement iin ia isocially iuseful iway iof ilife

Mulla iCommittee iReport, i1983

iWhat iare ithe iMulla iCommittee’s irecommendations ifor iyoung ioffenders? i

19
Separate icourts ifor iyoung ioffenders iThe ireport idoes inot iprovide ispecific ireference
ito ithe iduties iof ithe ijudge. iInstead, iit ilays idown iimportant irecommendations ifor icourts
iand ithe itreatment iof ijuveniles iwhile iin icustody. iThe iReport ialso iindicates ithe
iimportance iof ia ispecialized ilegal ibody ito iassess iand ireview ithe icases iof iyoung
ioffenders iin iorder ito iensure itheir irelease ion iprobation irather ithan ibeing isent ito iprison.
iIt istates:

(1) iSeparate icourts ifor iyoung ioffenders ishould ibe iestablished. iPre-sentence iinvestigation
ireports iof ithe iprobation iofficers ishould ibe ia istatutory irequirement ifor ideciding ithe
icases iof iyoung ioffenders. i(Recommendation i430)

19
iMulla iCommittee iReport, i1983. iAccess ion iApril i24, i2020.

30
i(2) iPre-sentence iinvestigation ireport ishould iinclude iall irelevant iantecedents iof ithe
iyoung ioffender iand ishould ialso iattempt ia iprognosis ifor ihis iresettlement iin ia isocially
iuseful iway iof ilife. i(Recommendation i432)

i(3) iYoung ioffenders iinvolved iin iminor iviolations ishould, iinstead iof ibeing ikept iin
ipolice icustody, ibe ikept iwith itheir ifamilies/guardians/approved ivoluntary iagencies ion ithe
iundertaking ithat ithey iwill ibe iproduced ibefore ithe ipolice ias iand iwhen irequired ifor
iinvestigation. i(Recommendation i433)

i(4) iYoung ioffenders, iinvolved iin iserious ioffences, iwhile iin ipolice icustody ishould ibe
ikept iseparate ifrom iadult icriminals iand ithe ipolice icustody ishould ibe ionly ifor ia
iminimum iperiod irequired ifor iinvestigation. i(Recommendation i434)

i(5) iAt ieach iinstitution ithere ishould ibe ia iReview iBoard. i(Recommendation i451)

(6) iAt ithe iend iof ievery isix imonths ithe iReview iBoard ishould iexamine ithe icase iof
ievery iyoung ioffender iand idetermine ihis isuitability ifor irelease ion ilicense.
i(Recommendation i452)

Annexe:

Use iof iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958, iby ithe iRajasthan iCourts i– iA
iGlimpse

Information ireceived ifrom iDeputy iDirector, iProsecution, iJodhpur iDivision ivide iletter ino.
ii i105 i(5) ilkek i/ i12/ i1301 idated i6th iNovember i2012 iwith iregard ito ithe iuse iof
iSections i3 iand i4 iof iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958 iby iall ithe itrial icourts iin
iRajasthan iand iJodhpur idivision ibetween iJanuary i2009 i- iJune i2012:

S.no i Place Under iSection i3 iof Under iSection i4 iof

iP.O iAct iPO iAct
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i1 Jodhpur 2658 5091
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i2 Pali 1599 4211
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i3 Jalore 508 2138

31
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i4 Sirohi 1032 2904
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i5 Barmer 702 3613
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i6 jaisalmer 308 1834

Total 6807 19791

Powers iand iObligations: iThe iProbation iOfficer

i20Appointment iof iProbation iOfficer iby iCourt:

Section i13 iof ithe iAct istates ithe ifollowing iin iregards ito ithe iappointment iof ithe
iProbation iOfficers: i(a) iA iperson iappointed ito ibe ia iprobation iofficer iby ithe iState
iGovernment ior irecognized ias isuch iby ithe iState igovernment. i

(b) iA iperson iprovided ifor ithis ipurpose iby ia isociety irecognised iin ithis ibehalf iby ithe
iState iGovernment.

(c) iIn iany iexceptional icase, iany iother iperson iwho, iin ithe iopinion iof ithe icourt, iis ifit ito
iact ias ia iprobation iofficer iin ithe ispecial icircumstances iof ithe icase.

Inquiring, ireporting iand isupervising iprobationers i

The isection i14 iof ithe iAct iindicates ithe ifollowing iduties iof ithe iProbation iOfficer:

(a) iInquire iin iaccordance iwith iany idirections iof ia icourt, iinto ithe icircumstances ior ihome
isurroundings iof iany iperson iaccused iof ian ioffence iwith ia iview ito iassist ithe icourt iin
idetermining ithe imost isuitable imethod iof idealing iwith ihim iand isubmitting ireports ito ithe
icourt.

i(b) iSupervise iprobationers iand iother ipersons iplaced iunder ihis isupervision, iand iwhere
inecessary iendeavor ito ifind ithem isuitable iemployment.

20
iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958, ip. i13

32
i(c) iAdvise iand iassist ioffenders iin ithe ipayment iof icompensation ior icosts iordered iby
ithe icourt. i

(d) iAdvise iand iassist iin isuch icases iand iin isuch imanner ias imay ibe iprescribed, ipersons
iwho ihave ibeen ireleased iunder isection i4.

i(e) iPerform isuch iother iduties ias imay ibe iprescribed.

21Preparing ia ipre-sentence ireport i

• One iof ithe imost iimportant iduties iof ia iPO ientrusted iin ithe isection i14 i(a) iof ithe
iAct iis ithe ipreparation iof ia ipre-sentence ireport ifor ithe iguidance iof ithe iCourt
iwhether ito igrant ithe ibenefit iof iprobation ito ithe iaccused ior inot.
• For ithe ipurpose iof iSection i14 i(a) iof ithe iAct, ithe iPO ishall iafter imaking
iinquiries iregarding ithe ioffender’s icharacter, ihis isocial iconditions, ifinancial iand
iother icircumstances iof ihis ifamily iwill iput idown irelevant ifacts, iinformation iin
ithe ireport ias irequired iby ithe iCourt
• The isummary iof ithe icase ishall iinclude ia istatement iof ifacts ialong iwith ithe iPO’s
iassessment iof ithe icase ito ihelp ithe icourt idetermine ithe imost isuitable imethod iof
idealing iwith ioffender iafter ihe ihas ibeen ifound iguilty.
• The ireport ishall ibe itreated ias i‘confidential’ iand idelivered ito ithe iCourt ion ithe
idate ispecified iby iit; iit imust ibe ienclosed iin ia isealed icover iif idelivered ito ithe
iCourt ia iday iprior iof ithe ijudgment.
• If ithe iPO iconsiders ithe iprobationer ihas imade isufficient iprogress iand ifurther
isupervision iis inot ineeded ihe ishall imake ian iapplication ito ithe iCourt iin
iconsultation iwith ithe iDistrict iProbation iOfficer iunder iintimation iof ithe iChief
iProbation iSuperintendent ifor idischarging ithe ibond iunder isub-section i3 iof ithe
iSection i8 iof ithe iAct.

Visiting iand ichecking ion iprobationers i

21
iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958, ip. i14.

33
 • The iPO imay, isubject ito iany iprovisions iof ithe isupervision iorder, irequire ithe
iprobationer ito ireport ito ihim iat ithe istated iintervals iand imeet ihim ifrequently ito
iensure ithat ithe istipulations iof ithe irules iof ithe iorder iare ifollowed.
• The iPO ishall ivisit ithe iprobationer iperiodically iin ihis ihome isurroundings ior ihis
ioccupational ienvironment iin iorder ito iassess ithe iprogress imade iby ihim iand
idifficulties ihe/she ifaced iduring isuch iprobation iperiod.
• Additionally, ithe iPO ihas ito ikeep ia itrack iof ithe ijuvenile iand imaintain ia ifollow
iup iaction ieven iafter ithe icompletion iof ithe isupervision iperiod.
• Ultimately, ithe iPO istrives ito ibring ia ichange ito ithe ibehavior iof ithe ioffender iand
imotivate ihim/her ito imake ia iprogress itowards ihis/her isuccessful irehabilitation iin
ithe icommunity

Monthly iReports iby iProbation iOfficers:

iIt iis ialso iprovided iin ithe irules imade iunder ithe iAct ithat iwhen ia isupervision iorder ihas
ibeen ipassed iand ithe iProbation iOfficer ihas ibeen iappointed, ihe iis iobliged ito isubmit
imonthly ireports ion ithe iconduct iof ibehavior iof ithe ioffender. iThe iCourt iis ientitled ito
iobserve ithe iprogress iof ithe iprobationer iand iif inecessary, iunder ithe iSection i8 iof ithe
iAct, ishould ivary iconditions iin ithe ibond isuch ias iextending ior ireducing iits iduration.

Offences iin iWhich iProbation iCannot iBe iGranted

We iwill inow ideal iwith ithose icases iwhere iprobation icannot ibe igranted:-

• Ahmed iv. iState iof iRajasthan22

It iwas iheld ithat ithe ibenefit iof ithis iAct icannot ibe iextended ito ia iperson iwho ihas
iindulged iin ian iact iwhich ihas iresulted iinto ian iexplosive isituation ileading ito ipossibilities
iof icommunal itension.

• State iof iMaharashtra iv. iNatverlal23 i

22
iAIR i1967 iRaj i190, i1967 iCriLJ i1053
23
i1980 iAIR i593, i1980 iSCR i(2) i340

34
The Supreme Court declined to accord to the accused found guilty, the benefit of Probation of
Offenders Act because smuggling of gold not only affects public revenue and public economy,
but often escapes detection

• Again iin iSmt. iDevki iv. iState iof iHaryana24, it was held that the benefit of Section 4
would not be extended to the abominable culprit who was found guilty of abducting a
teenage girl and forced her to sexual submission with commercial motive.
• In 2015, a Supreme Court bench consisting of Justices Pinaki Chandra Ghose and Uday
Umesh Lalit has ruled that the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act cannot be extended
to accused involved in crimes against women The accused, Sri Chand was alleged to
have lured a 12 year old girl, who was grazing buffaloes in the jungle, and taking her into
a room wherein she was forcibly undressed and the offense of rape was committed on
her. The court while giving the judgment relied on cases like Azhar Ali v. State of West
Bengal and State of Himachal Pradesh v. Dharam Pal
• 25
It iis ia isettled ilaw ithat inobody ican iclaim ibenefit iunder ithe iAct ias ia imatter iof
iright iIt iwas iobserved iin iState iof iSikkim iv. iDorjee iSherpa iAnd iOrs ithat ithe
iCourt ishould inot itake itechnical iviews iin icertain icases iand ishould itake iinto
iconsideration isome iother iaspects isuch ias ipossibility iof ilosing ithe ijob, ifor
iinvoking ithe iprovisions iof iProbation iof iOffenders iAct ieven iin iserious ioffences.
iIt ihas ifurther ibeen icontended ithat ithe iCourt ishould ialso itake iinto iconsideration
ithat ithe iconvicts ibelonging ito imiddle iclass ifamilies iwithout iany icriminal
iantecedent ioften ibecome ivictim iof icircumstances ibecause iof iundesirable icompany
iand iother ievil iinfluences iavailable ito isuch iyoung igeneration.

Who icannot ibe ipermitted iprobation?

i26Following igroup iof ipeople icannot ibe igranted iprobation:

1. Those iconvicted ifor ia iterm iof imore ithan isix iyears.

2. Those isentenced ifor icrime iagainst ipublic iorder ior inational isecurity

24
i1979 iAIR i1948, i1980 iSCR i(1) i21
25
i i1998 iCriLJ i2685
26
ihttp://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-453-the-probation-of-offenders-act-an-analysis.html

35
 3. Those iwho iwere iearlier iconvicted iof ioffence ipunishable iof imore ithan ione imonth
iand ione-day iimprisonment iand/or ifine iof imore ithan itwo ihundred irupees.
4. Convicts ialready iplaced iunder ithe iact ibefore.
5. Those iconvicts iwho iare ialready ion iappeal ior iserving isentence
6. Persons iconvicted iagainst iinsurgency ilaw, iwage irationalization iat iand iomnibus
ielection icode.

Also, iin ithe ijudgement iof iState iof iRajasthan iv. iSri iChand i(2015) icourt iheld ithat ino
iprobation ican ibe igranted ito iperson iwho ihas icommitted icrime iagainst iwomen.

The iprovisions iof iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958 inormally icannot ibe
iapplied ito:-

• ACB icases
• Section i304 iof ithe iIndian iPenal iCode,
• NDPS iCases
• Section i304-A iof ithe iIndian iPenal iCode
• Section i325 iof ithe iIndian iPenal iCode
• Sections i409, i467, i471 iof ithe iIndian iPenal iCode
• Kidnap iand iabduction
• Habitual ioffenders

Benefits iof iProbation iand iProblems

Benefits:
27
In ifact, ithe iuse iof iprobation imethod ican ibring ibenefits inot ionly ito icertain ikinds iof
ioffenders ibut ito ithe isociety iat ilarge. iThe iways iby iwhich iit ican ibenefit ia isociety iare
iby:

1. Providing irelease ioptions ito inon-criminal ioffenders i

2. Preventing irecidivism iand iproviding iopportunity ifor ireform ito iall ikinds iof
ioffenders i
3. iPreventing icongestion iin iprisons i

27
iH. iSingh i(ed), ithe iJournal iof iCorrectional iWork iXVII, iGovernment iJail iTraining iSchool, iLucknow,
i1971, ip. i27

36
 4. Saving iexpenses iof imaintaining ithe ioffender iin ian iinstitution;
5. Getting iimmediate icontribution ito ithe itotal inational iincome ifrom ithe ioffender
ithrough ihis ipurposeful iwork iin isocially iapproved ipursuits isuited ito ihis iage;
6. iPreventing imixing iup iof ihardened icriminals iand iyoung, ipetty iand ifirst itime
ioffenders
7. Preventing ifurther ioffences ifrom ihappening ibecause ithe iwork iof iprobation iis iboth
ipreventive iand icurative.
8. Probation isystem, iif iused ito iits ifull ipotential, ican ihelp ito iaddress iovercrowding
iof iprisons, iwhich iare ilargely ineglected, iunderstaffed iand ipoorly imanaged.

The iProblems

iThere iis ia igeneral iresistance iall iover ithe iworld ito imaking ichanges iin ithe icriminal
ijustice isystem iand iIndia iis ino iexception. iFurther, inot ienough iresearch idata iis iavailable
iabout icomparative imerits iof iparticular ipenal ior icorrectional isystems. i

The iimplementation iof iprovisions ilaid idown iin ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958,
ihas iproved ito ibe idifficult ifor ithe ifollowing ireasons:

• Limited inumber iof iprobation iofficers irecruited iand iinadequate itraining iprovided ito
ithem.
• Limited ibudgets iare igiven iby iStates ito idevelop ia istrong icorrectional iprogramme. i
• Indifferent iattitudes iof icourts iand iprosecution.
• Lack iof istandardization iof iProbation iRules iin ithe ivarious istates. i
• Non-use iof iprobation iofficers iby ithe icourts.

Statistics iof iOffenders iConvicted iand iconfined ifor iPetty iOffences:

28
The istatistics iof ithose iconvicted iand iconfined ifor ipetty ioffences isuch ias ithefts iand
iburglaries iinstead iof ibeing ireleased ion iprobation ishow ithat ithere iis ia ivast ifield iopen
ifor iprobation iwork iand isupervision iin ithe icommunity. iFor iinstance, iin i2000 ithere iwere

28
iSocial iDefence iin iIndia, iStatement ipresented ibefore ithe i4th iUN iCongress ion iPrevention iof iCrime iand
iTreatment iof iOffenders, i1970, ipg. i14

37
i85% iof ioffenders iconfined ito iprisons iwho iwere isentenced ifor ishort-term iimprisonment
iranging ifrom ione ito isix imonths.

iClearly isuch ishort iperiods iof iimprisonment iare inot ienough ifor iimparting itraining ior
idiscipline ito ithe ioffender iwhile iexposing ithe iinmate ito iinteraction iwith ihardened
icriminals iand imay idevelop ia ipropensity ifor icommitting imore icrimes.

29
According ito ithe iPrison iStatistics i(2011) ithe itotal iprison ipopulation icomprises iof
i3,72,926 iinmates iof iwhich ithere iare i2,41,200 iunder itrials iin iIndia iand i0.02% iof ithe
itotal ipopulation iare ithose ibetween i16–18 iyears iold13 iwith i43.7% ibeing ibetween i18-30
iyears14. iThe inumber iof ipetty ioffences icommitted iare irelatively ihigh: i9,610 iof iunder
itrials icommitted irobbery, i5,045 iburglary iand i23,267 icommitted ithefts.15 iIn iaddition,
iRecent iCrime iin iIndia iStatistics i(NCRB) ishow ithat iout iof itotal iarrestees i(32,70,016)
iduring ithe iyear i2012, ithere iwere ias imany ias i93.1% i(30, i43,287) inew ioffenders.
iFurthermore, ire-offending irates ior ithe ishare iof irecidivists iamong iall ioffenders ihave
ibeen iat ia iconstant i6.9 i% iin i2011 iand i2012 i(Crime iin iIndia iStatistics) i16, iand ithe
iabsolute ifigures iinvolved iin irepeating iIPC icrimes icontinue ito ibe ivery ihigh. iDuring ithe
iyear i2012 iit iwas ias ihigh ias i2,26,729 iand i2,16,189 iin ithe iyear i2011. iSikkim iand
iChandigarh ihave ishown ihighest irates iof irecidivism ias iStates iand iUnion iterritories,
irespectively. i

30
The inumber iof iundertrials iwho iwere idetained ifor i6 ito i12 imonths ireached i17.2% iof
ithe itotal ipopulation iof iundertrials iin iIndia’s iprisons.17 iThese ifigures idraw iattention ito
ithe iuse iof ipowers iand ifulfillment iof iobligations ibestowed iupon ithe icourts, iand ia iset iof
iofficers icalled ithe iprobation iofficers iwho iare iexpected ito iensure ithe ibenefits iof inew
imethods iof itreatment ilegitimized iby ithe iAct. iPenal ireform ianywhere ineeds ito isit iwell
iwith isuch isocial idefense istrategies ithat ieither ithe istate ihas ialready iinstitutionalized ior
ineeds ito ido iso. iIn ifact, ithe ilaws iof iprobation iplace iobligations ion icourts/magistrates ito
irestrict iimprisonment iof ioffenders iunder itwenty ione iyears iof iage, iand ito ifurnish
isubstantiation ifor inot iutilizing iprovisions ifor iprobation-based irelease iof ioffenders inot

29
iNational iCrime iRecords iBureau, iMinistry iof iHome iAffairs, iGovernment iof iIndia, iPrison iStatistics
iIndia, i2011, ip. i12.
30
iNCRB iPrison iStatistics i2011 iPage i55 i&58.

38
isentenced ito ilife iimprisonment. i31Here, ithere iis ia ilarge iconstructive irole ithat imagistrates
iand iprobation iofficers ican iplay iin ithe ire-engagement iand irehabilitation iof ioffenders.
iThough ithere iare ino isystematic istudies iin iIndia ito idemonstrate ithe iimpacts iof iprobation
ion ioffenders iin ithe icommunity ithe iprobation iofficers ido iconstitute ia icritical igroup,
iwho, iif itrained iwell, iwill ienquire iinto ithe isocial iconditions iof ithe ioffender ithat icould
ihave icontributed ito ioffence-based ibehaviour, irecommend ito icourt ithe itype iof iprobation
isuitable, iand ioffer ivarious isocial idefence imechanisms imade iavailable iby ithe istate ifor
itheir irehabilitation iand isimultaneously, iprotect isociety. iWhilst iprobation iand iits
iadministration iare iexpensive, ithey iare inowhere inear, ifinancially ior isocially, ias iexpensive
ias iincarceration. iBut ifor iall itheir iadvantages iin ifurthering inew ipenal iphilosophy iof
ireformation, iin iseveral istates, iprobation iofficers iremain ieither iun-appointed ior
iinsufficiently itrained iin ilaw iand icriminology ito iplay ithe imandated irole iof isupervision
iand ireformation. iThey ioften ifear ito iventure iinto ithe icommunity ior ito iengage iwith
iagencies iof ithe icriminal ijustice isystem. iThe icriminal ijustice isystem, ion iits ipart, iis inot
isufficiently iopen ito igive ithem ithe irequired iaccess ito ipenal iand icorrectional iinstitutions,
ior ithe inecessary iofficial irecognition iand idignity irequired ifor ithem ito ifeel iuseful,
imotivated iand ipurposeful. iCumulatively itaken, ithese ipractices icould ibe isaid ito iaccount
ifor ian iovercrowded iprison ipopulation iand ito ian iextent, ithe ire-offending irates ias iwell.

National iCrime iRecords iBureau’s iPrison iStatistics iIndia i– i2017 iReport i& iPrison
iReforms
Draft iNational iPolicy ion iPrison iReforms iand iCorrectional iAdministration:

Its ifeatures iinclude iamending ithe iconstitution ito iinclude”

Probation iand icommunity iservices ishould ibe iexercised iby ithe ijudiciary ias ia iform iof
ipunishment ito ia imaximum inumber iof ioffenders.

31
iBhattacharyya, iS.K. iJuvenile iJustice: ian iIndian iScenario, i2000, ip. i134

39
Recommendations i

1. iReduce iovercrowding iin iprisons iby ireforming ithe isentencing istructure ifor inon-violent
ipetty icrimes iand ifirst-time ioffenders ito iinclude ialternatives ito iimprisonment ithrough
iprobation, icommunity iservice, ifines iand ipsychological iand idrug itreatment i

2. i32Encourage ithe ijudiciary ithat ihas ibeen igiven ithe idiscretion ito iuse iprobation iinstead
iof iimprisonment ito iuse ithe inew itasks iand itechniques iof icorrections iby iensuring
ieffective iuse iof iSection i3, iSection i4 iand iSection i6 iof ithe iProbation iof iOffenders iAct,
i1958 i

3. iBuild ibetter ico-ordination ibetween ithe ijudiciary, iprobation iofficers iand ithe
iProsecution iDepartment iwho iare iin icharge iof iprobation icases ifor ieffective iuse iof ithe
iAct. iPeriodical imeetings iof ithe ijudicial iofficers iand iprobation iofficers ihave ibeen
ihelpful iin icreating iawareness iand istrengthening iimportance iand iimplementation iof
iprobation iin iIndia

i4. iDevelop ia iconsultative isystem ibetween ijudiciary iand iprobation iofficers ithat ibuilds
iformal irecognition iof iprobation iofficers iand itheir itrained irole iin ithe icourt

5. iStrengthen ithe irole iof ithe ijudiciary iin iprobation isystem iby iensuring ithat iMagistrates
iorder isupervisions iand icall ifor isubstantive ipre-sentence ireports ifrom ithe iprobation
iofficers iin icourt i

6. iStrengthen ithe imonitoring irole iof ijudiciary iin iprobation iand ibail ireleases iof ijuveniles
iand iyoung ioffenders ito iensure ithe iaccountability iof iprobation iofficers ito ithe icriminal
ijustice isystem, ithe ireduction iof irecidivism iand ire-integration iof iprobationer ito isociety.

i7. iIncrease ithe iimportance iof iprobation iin iPrison iMonitoring iSystems isuch ias ithe
iUndertrial iReview iMechanism iinside iprisons iby iimproving ibudgetary iallocation ifor
iprobation iand iinvolving, iwithout ifail, irepresentatives iof ithe iprobation iagencies iin ireview
iand irelease

32
iSocial iDefence iin iIndia, iStatement ipresented ibefore ithe i4th iUN iCongress ion iPrevention iof iCrime iand
iTreatment iof iOffenders, i1970, ipg. i6.

40
i8. iThere ishould ibe iat ileast ione iprobation iofficer iattached ito ievery isub-divisional icourt
iso ithat ihe/she iwould inot ihave ito icover ilong idistances ito ireach ithe icourts ior ithe
iclient.Increase ibudgetary iallocation ifor iappointments iof imore inumbers iof isuitable
iprobation iofficers

i9. iBuild iand iimprove ithe iprobation, ijoint isupervision iand ioffender ireform ischemes
iwith iSOP ifor iall istakeholders ifor ieffective ico-ordination, ireporting iand iaccountability
ibetween iprobation iservices, imagistracy, iprosecution, ipolice, ilegal iaid iauthorities, ithe
iprison ivisiting iauthorities i(NOVs), ithe iprison iadministration iand icivil isociety igroups
ioperating iat icommunity ilevel ito iprevent irecidivism

i10. i33Improve iresource iallocations ifor itraining, iprofessional iequipments, icommitment

iand imentoring iof iprobation iofficers iand iprison iofficers

i11. iEnsure ithat iofficers iappointed ias iProbation iOfficers iin ithe iState iare iexclusively
iused ifor iprobation i

12. iThe igovernment ishould iincrease iand iimprove ithe iBorstal iinstitutions ifor icare iand
isupervision.13. iImplement irecommendations iunder iBPR&D’s iModel iPrison iManual i&
iMulla iCommittee iReport ion istrengthening iprobation ias ian ialternative ito iimprisonment

i14. iEngage iwith iprobationers’ ifamily imembers iand iencourage icommunity iinvolvement
iin itheir irehabilitation iand ireintegration.

Conclusion:

The iuse iof iProbation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958, ihas ia ivast iscope ito ibe itapped iby ithe
ijudiciary iand iprobation iservices iparticularly iin ithe icurrent icontext iof iprison ireform ithat
ino ilonger isees iprison isentence ias ithe ibest imode iof itreatment ito iensure ithe iprotection
iof isociety. iIt iis iimportant ithat ithe ivarious iagencies iof ithe icriminal ijustice isystem icome
itogether ito imake iprobation ian ieffective ipractice iof inon-custodial itreatment iin iall
iappropriate icases iwhere ia irestorative iprinciple iof ijustice ineeds ito ibe iapplied.

33
iSocial iDefence iin iIndia, iStatement ipresented ibefore ithe i4th iUN iCongress ion iPrevention iof iCrime iand
iTreatment iof iOffenders, i1970, ipg. i5. iAccording ito iStatement ipresented ibefore ithe i4th iUN iCongress ion
iPrevention iof iCrime iand iTreatment iof iOffenders, i1970.

41
iAs ipart iof ipreparing ia irestorative icommunity ijustice isystem, ia iprobation iprogram imust
iconsider ithe iconcerns iof ithe ivictim, istrengthen iand ipromote icommunity ibonds, itarget
iand irespond ito ithe ifirst itime/young/petty ioffenders’ ias iwell ias irepeat ioffenders’
i‘problem’ ibehaviour iin iways ithat iadvance icompetencies. iGovernment idepartments ineed
ito istep iup ito ithis itask ithat idemands itraining, isensitization iand iinter-agency ico-
ordination. iProbation ican itake ia iproactive irole iin iimplementing irestorative iprinciples
ithrough ithe ipre-sentence iinvestigation ireport, iwhich iis isubmitted ito ithe icourt iat ithe
itime iof ioffender’s isentencing. iProbation, iunder ithis imodel, ican ieven ideal iwith ivictim-
offender imediation, idialogue, icommunity igroup iconferencing. iAs ipart iof irestorative
ijustice iformula, iprinciples iof icommunity isafety, ioffender iaccountability, ivictim- ioffender
imediation, idialogue, icommunity igroup iconferencing iare iseen ito ibe iadvanced iby
iprobation iwith isupervision iand ireform imodel. iAll ithis iincludes iredefining ithe ibroader
idefinition iof ia i‘case’ ifrom ipurely ioffender ito ivictim, icommunity, iand ioffender ireform.
iThis iis ia ilong iterm igoal ithat irequires iaddressing ithe ilimits iof ilaw iand ibuilding ia
ivaried iset iof iwhat imay ibe icalled i‘justice ipartnerships’ iwithin ithe icriminal ijustice
isystem, iparticularly ibetween ijudicial iofficers, ithe iprobation isystem iand iprison
iadministration, iand ibetween ithe icriminal ijustice isystem ias ia iwhole iand ithe icommunity.

42
 Bibliography

• Criminal iLaw: iCases iand iMaterials, iAuthor: iK.D. iGaur, i1985.

• Ratanlal iand iDhirajlal’s ithe iCode iof iCriminal iProcedure, i22nd iedition, i2017.
• Criminal iProcedure iCode iof iIndia: iIndian iLaw iSeries, i21 iApril i2015 iAuthor:
iShubham iSinha
• R.V. ikelkar’s iLectures ion iCriminal iprocedure: iIncluding iProbation iand ijuvenile
ijustice
By iK.N iChandrasekharan ipillai, i6th iedition i2017.

• NCRB iPrison iStatistics i2011 iPage i55 i&58.

• Bhattacharyya, iS.K. iJuvenile iJustice: ian iIndian iScenario, i2000

• http://jjscup.gov.in/docs/the-probation-of-offenders-act-1958.pdf
• Probation iof iOffenders iAct, i1958
• Chapter iXI, iCriminal iManual, iProbation iof iOffenders iAct
• Mulla iCommittee iReport, i1983
• Model iPrison iManual, iBureau iof iPolice iResearch iand iDevelopment, iMinistry iof
iHome iAffairs, i2003.

43