Probation Of Offenders Act Inapplicable In Serious POCSO Offences Punishable With Life Imprisonment: Delhi High Court

A division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja passed the ruling while hearing arguments on sentencing after convicting a man for offences under Sections 363, 366 and 342 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act in State's appeal against acquittal.

The convict sought release on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (POA), contending that he was 21 years old at the time of the incident in 2014, was the sole breadwinner of his family, and had no prior criminal antecedents.

Opposing the plea, the State argued that Section 6 of the POCSO Act prescribed a minimum sentence of 10 years which could extend to imprisonment for life and therefore relief of probation was unavailable in terms of Section 6 of POA.

Accepting the submission, the Court observed that under the Probation of Offenders Act, benefit of probation cannot be extended where the offence is punishable with life imprisonment.

Reliance was placed on Jugal Kishore Prasad v. State of Bihar (1972) where the Supreme Court said the mere fact that a lesser sentence could also be imposed would not take the offence outside the category of offences punishable with life imprisonment.

The Court further clarified that for applicability of Section 6 of the Probation of Offenders Act, the relevant age is the age of the accused on the date of conviction and sentencing, and not the date of commission of offence.

Since the convict was above 21 years of age on the date of conviction in May 2026, the Court held that he was not entitled to the statutory benefit.

“Section 6 of the Probation of Offenders Act applies to the accused, who is under 21 years of age on the date of imposition of punishment and not on the date of commission of offence. If on the date of order of conviction and sentence, the accused is below 21 years of age, only then, the provisions of Section 6 of the Act shall apply.”

The Bench also referred to a Karnataka High Court judgment in State of Karnataka v. Prathap & Anr. (2024) which held that the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act do not have any application in the case under POCSO Act.

“The POCSO Act was enacted to provide for protection of children from the offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography. Section 6 of the POCSO Act at the relevant time provided minimum punishment for 10 years, which may extend to imprisonment for life with fine. Keeping in mind the objective behind the enactment as also the punishment, we are of the view that respondent is not entitled for grant of probation under Section 4 and 6 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958,” the Court observed.

It then proceeded to sentence the convict to the minimum punishment of 10 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

The Bench also awarded compensation of Rs.10.5 lakh to the child survivor under the victim compensation scheme, noting the gravity of the offence and emotional trauma suffered by the victim.

Appearance: Mr. Aman Usman, APP with Mr. Manvendra Yadav, Mr. Atiq Ur Rehman, Advocates along with SI Sandeep Bishnoi, PS Mayapuri for Appellant; Mr. Dinesh Malik, Mr. Puneet Jain, Mr. Lavish Arora, Advocates with respondent in person.

Case title: State v. Deepak

Case no.: CRL.A. 236/2021