Probation of Offenders Act, 1958
Section 4: Power of court to release certain offenders on probation of good conduct
(1) When any person is found guilty of having committed an offence not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the court by which the person is found guilty is of opinion that, having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender, it is expedient to release him on probation of good conduct, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the court may, instead of sentencing him at once to any punishment direct that he be released on his entering into a bond, with or without sureties, to appear and receive sentence when called upon during such period, not exceeding three years, as the court may direct, and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behaviour:
Provided that the court shall not direct such release of an offender unless it is satisfied that the offender or his surety, if any, has a fixed place of abode or regular occupation in the place over which the court exercises jurisdiction or in which the offender is likely to live during the period for which he enters into the bond.
(2) Before making any order under sub-section (1), the court shall take into consideration the report, if any, of the probation officer concerned in relation to the case.
(3) When an order under sub-section (1) is made, the court may, if it is of opinion that in the interests of the offender and of the public it is expedient so to do, in addition pass a supervision order directing that the offender shall remain under the supervision of a probation officer named in the order during such period, not being less than one year, as may be specified therein, and may in such supervision order impose such conditions as it deems necessary for the due supervision of the offender.
(4) The court making a supervision order under sub-section (3) shall require the offender, before he is released, to enter into a bond, with or without sureties, to observe the conditions specified in such order and such additional conditions with respect to residence, abstention from intoxicants or any other matter as the court may, having regard to the particular circumstances, consider fit to impose for preventing a repetition of the same offence or a commission of other offences by the offender.
(5) The court making a supervision order under sub-section (3) shall explain to the offender the terms and conditions of the order and shall forthwith furnish one copy of the supervision order to each of the offenders, the sureties, if any, and the probation officer concerned.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 15 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 4
-
Santosh Sahadev Khajnekar v. The State of Goa
Whether conviction of appellant for the offences punishable u/s.8 of the Goa Children’s Act, 2003 is sustainable; whether the appellant deserves to be given benefit under provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
-
Nagarajan & Anr. v. The State of Tamil Nadu
Whether the benefit of the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 can be granted to the appellants; if the answer to the aforesaid issue is in the negative, can the reduced sentence that the Food Safety and…
-
Chellammal and Another v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police
Whether the appellants could be granted the benefit of probation either u/s.360(1) of CrPC or u/s.4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958; whether the High Court was justified in not extending the benefit of probation…
-
Suhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.
Access to free and timely legal aid for prison inmates.
-
Sunita Devi v. The State of Bihar & Anr.
Need for a comprehensive sentencing policy. Trial against the accused under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was conducted by the judicial officer in utmost haste and the accused was denied due…
- Chet Ram Yadav & Anr v. State of Delhi
- Gyarsi v. The State NCT of Delhi
- Parmod Kumar Kushwaha v. State of Delhi
- Som Dutt & Ors. v. The State of Himachal Pradesh
- State of Madhya Pradesh v. Man Singh
- Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v. State of Maharashtra
- Mohd. Hashim v. State of UP & Ors.
- State of Punjab v. Saurabh Bakshi
- State Through C.B.I., Anti Corruption Branch, Chandigarh v. Sanjiv Bhalla & Anr.
- Sumer Singh v. Surajbhan Singh and Others
- Nanak Ram v. State of Rajasthan
- Birju v. State of M.P.
- Sanjay Dutt (A-117) v. The State of Maharashtra, Through CBI (Stf), Bombay
- Gita Ram & Anr. v. State of H.P.
- Sunil Kumar v. State of Haryana
- Alister Anthony Pareira v. State of Maharashtra
- State of Punjab v. Balwinder Singh and Ors.
- Amarjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
- Md. Monir Alam v. State of Bihar
- Sonali Mukherjee v. Union of India
- Chand Gupta and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh
- Bala Baine Linga Raju v. State of A.P.
- Paul George v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi
- Gulzar v. State of M.P.
- Daljit Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab Through Secretary Home Affairs
- Chani v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
- Raj Pal and Ors. v. The State of Haryana
- M.C.D. v. State of Delhi and Anr.
- Prithvi Raj and Ors. v. Kamlesh Kumar and Anr.
- Commandant 20 Bn. Itb Police v. Sanjay Binjola
- Dalbir Singh v. State of Haryana
- Harichand v. Director of School Education
- Nilgiris Bar Association v. T.K. Mahalingam and Anr.
- Jawala Ram and Anr. v. State of H.P.
- Union of India and Ors. v. Bakshi Ram
- Union of India and Another v. Tulsiram Patel and Others
- Shanker Dass v. Union of India & Anr.
- State of Maharashtra v. Kapur Chand Kesarimal Jain
- Ved Prakash v. State of Haryana
- Superintendent, Central Excise, Bangalore v. Bahubali
- Uttam Singh v. The State (Delhi Administration)
- Arvind Mohan Sinha v. Amulya Kumar Biswas & Ors.
- Jai Narain v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
- Ishardas v. State of Punjab
- Lala Ram v. Hari Ram
- Rattan Lal v. State of Punjab