Section 5 – Power of court to require released offenders to pay compensation and costs – Probation of Offenders Act, 1958:
(1) The Court directing the release of an offender under Section 3 or Section 4, may, if it thinks fit, make at the same time a further order directing him to pay—
Image Source: cdni.wired.co.uk
(a) Such compensation as the Court thinks reasonable for loss or injury caused to any person by the commission of the offence; and
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(b) Such costs of the proceedings as the Court think reasonable.
(2) The amount ordered to be paid under sub-section (1) may be recovered as a fine in accordance with the provisions of Sections 386 and 387 of the Code.
(3) A civil Court trying any suit, arising out of the same matter for which the offender is prosecuted, shall take into account any amount paid or recovered as compensation under sub-section (1) in awarding damages.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
This section empowers the Court to direct the offender who is allowed the benefit of release on probation under Section 3 or 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to pay reasonable compensation as also the costs of the proceedings to the victim of his crime.
The quantum of compensation shall, however, not exceed the actual damages caused to the victim and it may be recovered from the accused as a fine under sub-section (2) of this section. The costs of the proceedings include process-fee, counsel’s fee, stamp duty etc. The amount of compensation and costs shall be recoverable as arrears of land revenue under the Code of Land Revenue.
In Gudda v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the appellant caused 19 injuries to the complainant and was convicted under Section 323, I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for one month and a fine of Rs. 500/- and to undergo two months’ R.I. in default of payment of fine. On appeal, the High Court ordered the release of the appellant under Section 3 or 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act and directed that he should pay a compensation of Rs. 5000/- to the victim who suffered as many as nineteen injuries.
Likewise, in the case of Raju and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the appellants were convicted under Section 323, I.P.C. for causing simple hurt to the complainant. The High Court in appeal allowed the benefit of release on probation to the appellants on the ground that award of sentence is not mandatory for an offence under Section 323, I.P.C. and it may be punishable only with fine.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Moreover, the appellants being first-offenders and totality of circumstances of the case demanded that they be let-off on payment of fine of Rs. 1000/- each without extending the benefit of probation under Section 3 or 4 or 6 of the Act. The Court further ordered that out of the fine so recovered, an amount of Rs. 3000/- be paid to the complainant as a compensation for the injuries suffered by him.
