Supreme Court criticises Allahabad High Court for granting probation to repeat offenders

The Supreme Court reviewed whether the application of the Probation of Offenders Act was appropriate given the nature of the crime and the accused's criminal history.

Who it concerns: Petitioner/Appellant: Umesh Chand (brother of the victim); Respondents: State of U.P. and the two accused (Onkar Nath and Shiv Kumar); Bench: Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran.

What the court decided

• Set aside the impugned order of the Allahabad High Court that had released the accused under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
• Directed the accused (2nd and 3rd respondents) to surrender within two weeks of the order.
• Ordered that if the accused fail to surrender, the Additional Sessions Court, Bahraich, must take immediate proceedings to apprehend them.
• Restored the Criminal Appeals before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow.
• Directed the High Court to hear the appeals only after ensuring the accused are taken into custody.
• Allowed the appeals with the aforementioned directions.
• Rejected any pending applications.

Also in the document

• The Court noted that the accused had not undergone any sentence and were not in custody for a single day despite the conviction.
• The Court observed that the High Court had not considered the report of the Probation Officer, which listed multiple pending and past criminal cases against the accused.
• The Court highlighted that the victim suffered grievous injuries, including a nearly severed thumb and loss of functionality in both upper limbs, and continues to suffer pain and disability.
• The Court criticized the High Court for relying on the passage of 22 years as a ground for probation, noting the accused were on bail and involved in other criminal activities during that time.