JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal revision is directed against the orders of the learned Sessions Judge Jhalawar, dated March 12, 1981, whereby the learned Sessions Judge upon Id the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate dated October 3, 1980, convicting the accused-petitioner for offences under Sec 324/323 IPC and semencing him for three months rigorous imprisonment and a line of Rs. 100/-, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 324 I.P.C. 2. It has been contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that the learned lower courts have not recorded any reasons as to why the accused-petitioner should not be extended the benefit of section 360 Cr. P.C 1973. It was also contended that under section 361 Cr. P.C. 1973 reasoning have to be recorded for denial of the benefits of section 360 Cr. P C. It has also been contended that at the time of the commission of the offence the accused-petitioner was only 17 years of age, and that he would be turned into a hardened criminal if he is allowed to continue in jail as a convict. It has also been contended that the accused-petitioner has been facing trial since June 8, 1977. It was, therefore, contended that the accused-petitioner may be given the benefit of Section 360 Cr. P.C. 3. The Dy. Government Advocate, Shri R.P. Singh appeared on behalf of the State and opposed the grant of benefits under Section 360 Cr. P.C. to the accused-petitioner.Having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I have no hesitation in holding that the learned lower courts were justified in convicting the accused-petitioner. The conviction of the accused-petitioner is accordingly upheld. 4. It appears that the accused-petitioner comes out of a respected family and is not a previous convict The accused-petitioner was of 17 years of age at the time of commission of the offence, and even at the time of pronouncement of judgment he was below 21 years of age. The accused-petitioner has remained in custody for a week or so and has been sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment only. The accused-petitioner has remained in custody for a week or so and has been sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment only. No useful purpose would be served by converting the accused-petitioner into a hardened criminal, Under these circumstances, it does not appear unreasonable to extend the benefit of Sec 360 Cr.P.C. 1973 to the accused-petitioner shall be enlarged on probation if he executes a personal bond of Rs. 2,000/- with a surety of the like amount of maintain peace and good behaviour for a period of one year to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Jhalawar, with an undertaking that the accused-petitioner shall appear whenever called upon to do so to receive and undergo the sentence awarded to him.Revision partly allowed. *******