The probation officer is the bridge between the Court and the offender to whom benefit of the Act can be extended.
As per Section 15 every Probation Officer is deemed to be a public servant within the meaning of Section 21 of the I.P.C.
In State of Maharashtra Vs. Bondya Patil reported in 1978 Cri. L.J.41 Hon’ble Bombay High Court emphasized the importance of Probation Officer by observing that,“The Probation Officer is an important officer in the machinery for the implementation of the Act. The post is created to assist the courts in the matter of probation. There is, therefore, no reason why his services should not be availed of before the order for probation is passed. It is essential that his services should be utilized, for otherwise important material relevant to be considered will not be available to the Court at all.
It is, therefore, very essential that the Courts should not, in order to hasten up the disposal of the cases, dispense with the calling for a report and give the benefit of Section 4 to the offenders without there being sufficient material on record before them.”
Some Relevant judgments
Daulat Ram Vs. The State of Haryana 1972 Cri LJ 1517
Sudesh Kumar Vs. State of Uttarkhand AIR 2008 SC 1120
Ramji Misar Vs. State of Bihar AIR 1963 SC 1088
State of Rajasthan Vs. Sri Chand, SC. Criminal Appeal No.561/2009
Dalbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana AIR 2000 SC 1677
Vajja Srinivasu alias Srinu Vs. State of A. P. ((2002) 9 SCC 620)
Kamroonissa Vs. The state of Maharashtra (AIR 1974 SC 2117)
Superintendent Central Excise Bangalore Vs. Bahubali AIR 1979 SC 1271
