[Probation of Offenders Act] Supreme Court orders release of woman convicted for hurling casteist abuses at Scheduled Tribe woman

The Supreme Court last week ordered the release of a woman, who had allegedly hurled casteist abuses against another woman belonging to the Scheduled Tribe community who was the president of her village's education committee [Kunti Kumari vs State of Jharkhand].A Bench of Justices S Abdul Nazeer and Vikram Nath ordered release of the convict in exercise of powers under the Probation of Offenders Act,1958 after noting that she had no prior convictions and the offence for which she was convicted carried a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment."There is no previous conviction of the appellant. Further, Section 11 of 1958 Act provides that an order under this Act may be made by any court empowered to try and sentence the offender to imprisonment and also by the High Court or any other court when the case comes before it on appeal or in revision. Thus, this Court under the 1958 Act itself can pass an order at this stage," the Court held.The Court was hearing a petition filed by one Kunti Kumari challenging her conviction under Section 504 (intentional insult) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). She urged the bench to extend the benefit of the provisions contained in the Probation of Offenders Act,1958, which allows releasing offenders on probation or after due admonition..As per the prosecution case, the complainant belonged to the Santhal tribe and was the president of the education committee of the Kora Para village. On December 18, 2007, the committee along with teachers and other members were to assemble for a budget meeting.During the meeting, Kunti allegedly snatched meals packet from the complainant and hurled casteist abuses at her. She went on the state that the complainant belonged to a caste that relishes pig and cow meat and that even a dog will not eat the food that she distributes.The appellant was convicted under Section 504 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of the SC/ST Act by the trial court by a judgment dated August 28, 2010 and was sentenced to four months simple imprisonment under Section 504 IPC and six months simple imprisonment under Section 3(i)(x) of the SC/ST Act.The criminal appeal filed by the appellant was partly allowed by the Jharkhand High Court which, by its judgment dated December 9, 2016, set aside the conviction and sentence under Section 3(i)(x) of the SC/ST Act. It, however, upheld the conviction under Section 504 IPC and reduced the sentence to 15 days simple imprisonment.The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the finding of conviction. However, as regards the sentence, the apex court noted that Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act confers power upon the court to release certain offenders after admonition when a person is guilty of having committed an offence punishable with imprisonment for not more than two years, or with fine, or with both, under the Indian Penal Code or any other law, and there is no previous conviction proved against such offender."Section 3 of the 1958 Act confers power upon the court to release certain offenders after admonition when a person is found guilty of having committed an offence punishable under Section 379 or Section 380 or Section 381 or Section 404 or Section 420 of the IPC or any offence punishable with imprisonment for not more than two years, or with fine, or with both, under the IPC or any other law, and there is no previous conviction proved against such offender," the judgment noted.In the present case, the conviction was under Section 504 IPC where the maximum sentence provided is two years and there was no previous conviction of the appellant, the Bench noted. The Court, therefore, directed that the appellant be released after admonition. "Considering the facts of the case, we deem it appropriate that the appellant may be released instead of carrying out the sentence after due admonition. Accordingly, agreeing with the conviction under Section 504 IPC, the appellant is directed to be released after admonition," the Court ordered. .[Read Judgment]