Milind Ashruba Dhanve v. State of Maharashtra 2026 INSC 355 - Probation of Offenders Act - Fine
The benefit of Section 4 is available to an offender who has been sentenced only to payment of fine.
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - Section 4- The benefit of Section 4 of the 1958 Act is available to an offender who has been sentenced only to payment of fine- 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. The expression ‘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. Sections 3 and 4 of the 1958 Act govern acts committed by an offender in relation to the specific punishments prescribed under the IPC, BNS and any other law, these provisions must naturally extend to sentences including fine. (Para 24-26)
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - Section 3,4 ; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) –Section 360 - Benefit under Section 360(1) and (3) of CrPC can enure only in absence of a prior conviction, whereas Section 4 of the 1958 Act leaves antecedents of the offender to the Court's discretion, and Section 3 of the 1958 Act while requiring absence of prior conviction also expands the concept of previous conviction to include prior orders under the Section 3 and 4 of the 1958 Act itself. (Para 29)
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - Section 3,4 - Under Section 3, a convict can be released by the Court after admonition only with respect to offences as specified therein. On the other hand, while exercising the power under Section 4, the Court may release the offender on probation of good conduct with respect to the offences as prescribed. In case a person has been released after admonition under Section 3 or on probation of good conduct under Section 4, they shall not face a disqualification attaching to such conviction. (Para 17-19) Release on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the 1958 Act depends on the Court forming an opinion that such release is expedient. In doing so, the Court must consider relevant factors, particularly the nature of the offence. Naturally, probation should be granted only where the Court records the satisfaction as per the factors indicated above, and grant of benefit would serve the purpose with intent to reform the offenders. (Para 39)
Case Info
Here’s the structured information from the judgment you shared:
Basic Case Details
Case name: Milind S/o Ashruba Dhanve and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra
Neutral citation: 2026 INSC 355
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
Judgment date: April 10, 2026
Case laws and citations referred
- Rattan Lal v. State of Punjab, 1964 SCC OnLine SC 40
- Ved Prakash v. State of Haryana, (1981) 1 SCC 447
- Mohd. Hasim v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2017) 2 SCC 198
- Bharat Singh v. New Delhi Tuberculosis Centre, (1986) 2 SCC 614
- Kerala Fishermen’s Welfare Fund Board v. Fancy Food, (1995) 4 SCC 341
- Union of India v. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar, (2008) 9 SCC 527
- Bombay Anand Bhavan Restaurant v. ESI Corporation, (2009) 9 SCC 619
- Sanjay Dutt v. State of Maharashtra, 2013 SCC OnLine SC 252
- Lakhanlal v. State of M.P., (2021) 6 SCC 100
- State of Maharashtra v. Jagmohan Singh Kuldip Singh Anand, (2004) 7 SCC 659
- Dalbir Singh v. State of Haryana, (2000) 5 SCC 82
- State of Gujarat v. Jamnadas G. Pabri, (1975) 1 SCC 138 : AIR 1974 SC 2233
Statutes / laws referred
- Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 – especially Sections 3, 4, 6, 11, and 12
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 323, 324, 379, 380, 381, 404, 420, 498-A, 143, 147, 148, 149, 354-A, 504, 506, and Section 53 (punishments)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 360 (probation / admonition) and Sections 121, 124, 373 (by reference in s. 360(6))
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) – Section 4 (punishments, including community service)
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) – Section 401 (corresponding to Section 360 CrPC)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) – Sections 8 and 12 (from the trial charges)
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – Sections 3 and 4 (cited in a precedent, not this case’s charges)
Three‑sentence brief summary
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellants under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 IPC for assaulting a 17‑year‑old victim’s family, but considered only whether they should be granted the benefit of probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. It held that “punishment” in the 1958 Act includes a sentence of fine and that Section 4 can apply even where the sentence is only of fine, thus extending Section 4(1) benefit (probation of good conduct) to A‑1, A‑2 and A‑3, and Section 3 benefit (release after admonition) to A‑4. The Court directed that the fines already imposed be treated as compensation to the victims and clarified that, by virtue of Section 12 of the 1958 Act, the appellants will not suffer disqualification affecting their government service careers arising from the conviction.
