Convicts Sentenced To Only Fine Also Entitled To Benefit Of Probation Of Offender Act : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that offenders sentenced only to payment of a fine can still be granted the benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

A bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Atul S Chandurkar ordered the release of convicts, who were convicted under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 IPC for assault and were sentenced to only a fine of Rs. 500-2,000/- without any substantive punishment.

The Court rejected the 'narrow' construction of the term 'release' under Section 4 of the 1958 Act, stating that “'release' cannot mean release only from custody. It has to be read as releasing from the obligation to serve a sentence of payment of fine.”

The Court said that 'fine' is itself a form of punishment under the penal law and thus, 'release' under the statute includes release from the obligation to undergo such punishment.

The case arose out of a local altercation where the accused were convicted under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 IPC for assault.

Both the trial court and the Bombay High Court imposed only fines (₹500–₹2,000), with no substantive imprisonment. Before the Supreme Court, the appellants did not challenge their conviction but sought the benefit of probation under Sections 3 and 4 of the 1958 Act.

The State opposed the plea, contending that since there was no punishment of imprisonment, the concept of 'release' was inapplicable under Section 4. However, the Court firmly rejected this narrow reading, holding that “any reference to 'punishment' in 1958 Act has to be construed as per enumeration contained in Section 53 of IPC and Section 4 of BNS and should undoubtedly include 'fine' as well…. thus, the benefit of Section 4 of the 1958 Act is available to an offender who has been sentenced only to payment of fine.”

“'release' as contained in Section 4 of 1958 Act should be read as to set the offender at liberty from receiving sentence, even of fine only.”, the court added.

In terms of the aforesaid, the Court disposed of the appeal, with a direction to release the Appellants on probation subject to the fulfilment of conditions of good conduct and supervision.

Cause Title: MILIND S/O ASHRUBA DHANVE AND ORS. VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 370

Click here to download judgment

Appearances:

For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Amol B. Karande, AOR; Mr. Vishal Jogdand, Advocate; Mr. B. Pallesh Lakshmi, Advocate; Ms. Akshada, Advocate; and Mr. Ashutosh Srivastava, Advocate.

For the Respondent(s): Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR.