Conviction Upheld, Sentence Reconsidered: Supreme Court Focuses on Probation for Husband and Mother-in-Law.


22 April 2025 Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law  

In Chellammal & Another v/s State Represented By The Inspector of Police., the Supreme Court of India has set aside a part of the Madras High Court's order concerning the sentence awarded to a husband convicted of cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). While upholding the conviction of both the husband and his mother (the appellants), the apex court remitted the matter back to the High Court for a limited reconsideration: whether the appellants are entitled to the benefit of probation under the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC) or the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

The case originated from the death of a young woman who set herself ablaze following a quarrel with the appellants, her husband and mother-in-law, over birthday celebrations in 2008. While a dying declaration cleared the appellants of dowry death charges, both the Sessions Court and the High Court found them guilty of cruelty under Section 498A, IPC, based on allegations of occasional beatings and verbal abuse. The High Court had reduced the husband's imprisonment sentence but maintained the conviction and the mother-in-law's sentence.


 

 

During the hearing before the Supreme Court, the appellants' counsel pleaded for setting aside the imprisonment sentence, citing the long passage of time since the incident (17 years), their lack of prior criminal history, and their continued care for the now-adult daughter of the deceased and the second appellant.

The Supreme Court, however, noted that Section 498A, IPC, mandates both imprisonment and fine, precluding the sole enhancement of fine as an alternative. This led the Court to consider the possibility of probation.

The apex court observed that both the Sessions Court and the High Court had seemingly overlooked the provisions for releasing offenders on probation of good conduct under Section 360 Cr.PC and Section 4 of the Probation Act. The Court extensively discussed these provisions and relevant precedents, highlighting that the Probation Act has a wider scope than Section 360 Cr.PC, particularly for offenses not punishable by death or life imprisonment.

The Supreme Court emphasized the mandatory duty of courts to consider granting probation when the circumstances outlined in Section 4(1) of the Probation Act are met, unless its applicability is explicitly excluded. Furthermore, Section 361 Cr.PC requires courts to record special reasons if they choose not to apply the provisions of Section 360 Cr.PC or the Probation Act when they could have.

Finding that the lower courts had failed to consider the possibility of probation, the Supreme Court concluded that this omission constituted a failure of justice. While acknowledging that obtaining a report from the probation officer is a condition precedent for granting probation under Section 4(2) of the Probation Act, the Court decided to remit the matter.

The Supreme Court maintained the appellants' conviction but directed the High Court to reconsider the sentence specifically on the aspect of granting probation, after obtaining a report from the relevant probation officer. The appellants' existing exemption from surrendering will continue until the High Court makes its decision.


Section 360., Code of Criminal Procedure - 1973  

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  

Section 498A., Indian Penal Code - 1860  

Indian Penal Code, 1860  

Probation of Offenders Act, 1958