JUDGMENT : G.B. Patnaik, J. - Both these revision applications are directed against a common judgment of the Sessions Judge, Ganjam dismissing Criminal Appeal Nos. 128 and 133 of 1981 and both those criminal appeals were directed against one and the same order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Berhampur, in G. R. Case No. 1092 of 1979. The Petitioners in both those revisions were tried by tire learned Magistrate for having committed the offence u/s 292, I.P.C. on the allegation that they were in possession of and were selling some obscene books on 19.11-1979. The Magistrate convicted them u/s 292, I.P.C. and sentenced them to suffer simple imprisonment for three months each and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months each. 2. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge maintained the conviction. But so far as the sentence is concerned modified the same to S. I. for three months to each of the Petitioners and fine of Rs. 300/-, each in default to undergo S. I. for fifteen days each. "Hence the present revisions. 3. The prosecution case in short is that p.w. 6 having reliable information about the sale of obscene books by the Petitioners, raided the Book stall of Krishna Chandra Suar at Berhampur Bus stand on 19-11-1979 at 8. 30 p. m. being accompanied by Havildar K. Sethi and constable Banchhanidhi Patnaik. On search of the premises, they found obscene books called 'Rasavanti'. Thereafter they raided the Book Stall of the Petitioner Paldesetti Lakshman Rao near Girija Bhavan and also seized some of the said books 'Rasavanti'. He then lodged F. I. R. (Ext. 1) whereafter a case was registered, investigation was taken up and on completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons who stood their trial u/s 292, I.P.C. 4. The defence plea is one of complete denial. 5. Prosecution had examined as many as six witnesses and defence examined none. On behalf of the prosecution several documents were exhibited. Of the six prosecution witnesses, P.Ws. 1,2, 4 and 5 are the seizure witnesses and p.w. 6 is the Investigating Officer, p.w. 3 is a lecturer in English whose opinion was sought for on the question whether the Book was obscene or not. Relying upon the evidence of P.Ws. On behalf of the prosecution several documents were exhibited. Of the six prosecution witnesses, P.Ws. 1,2, 4 and 5 are the seizure witnesses and p.w. 6 is the Investigating Officer, p.w. 3 is a lecturer in English whose opinion was sought for on the question whether the Book was obscene or not. Relying upon the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 4, the Magistrate came to the conclusion that the Book 'Rasavanti' was seized from both the premises, one belonging to the Petitioner Krishna Chandra Suar and the other belonging to the Petitioner Laxman Rao. The two seizure lists, Exts. 1, and 3/1 were duly proved and the signatures of the respective accused-Petitioners on them have also been proved. . On a thorough consideration of the evidence, the Magistrate recorded the finding that the books in question had been seized from the shops of the respective Petitioners. On the question whether the book is obscene or not so as to attract the provisions of Section 292, I.P.C. relying upon the evidence of p.w. 3 as well as his certificate, Ext. 2 and the Magistrate himself on examining the book in question came to the conclusion that the book is undoubtedly an obscene one and accordingly conviction u/s 292, I.P.C. was recorded. 6. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge has agreed with the conclusion of the learned Magistrate and upheld the conviction. 7. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners in each case contends that the book in question is a piece of literature and cannot be said to be obscene so as to attract the provisions of Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code, particularly when the said word has not been defined in the Penal Code. No doubt the said word has not been defined in the Code, but in that case, it must receive the ordinary literary meaning. The Supreme Court in the case of Ranjit D. Udeshi Vs. State of Maharashtra observed: ... The Indian Penal Code does not define the word 'obscene' and this delicate task of how to distinguish between that which is artistic and that which is obscene has to be performed by Courts, and in the last resort by us. The Supreme Court in the case of Ranjit D. Udeshi Vs. State of Maharashtra observed: ... The Indian Penal Code does not define the word 'obscene' and this delicate task of how to distinguish between that which is artistic and that which is obscene has to be performed by Courts, and in the last resort by us. The test which we evolve must obviously be of a general character but it must admit of a just application from case to case by indicating a line of demarcation not necessarily,sharp but sufficiently distinct to distinguish between that which is obscene and that which is not. None has so far attempted a definition of obscenity because the meaning can be .laid bare without attempting a definition by describing what must be looked for. It may however be said at once that treating with sex and nudity in art and literature cannot be regarded as evidence of obscenity without something more. It is not necessary that the angels and saints of Michael Angelo should be made to wear breaches before they can be viewed. If the rigid test of treating with sex as the minimum ingredient were accepted hardly any writer of fiction today would escape the fate lawrence had in his days. Half the book-shop would dose and the other half would deal in nothing but moral and religious books which Lord Campbell boasted was the effect of his Act?. At another place, the learned Judge observed: ....an overall view of the obscene matter in the setting of the whole work would, of course, be necessary, but the obscene matter must be considered by itself and separately to find out whether it is so gross and its obscenity so decided that it is likely to deprive and corrupt those whose minds are open to influences of this sort and into whose hands the book is likely to fall. In this connection the interests of our contemporary society and particularly the influence of the book on it must not be overlooked. A number of considerations may here enter which it is not necessary to enumerate, but we must draw attention to one fact. In this connection the interests of our contemporary society and particularly the influence of the book on it must not be overlooked. A number of considerations may here enter which it is not necessary to enumerate, but we must draw attention to one fact. Today our National arid Regional Languages are strengthening themselves by new literacy standards after a deadening period under the impact of English, Emulation by our writers of an Obscene-book under the aegis of this Court's determination is likely to pervert our entire literature because obscenity pays and true art finds little popular support. Only an obscurent will deny the need for such caution. This consideration marches with all law and precedent on, this subject and so considered we can only say that where obscenity and art are mixed, art must be so preponderating as to throw the obscenity into a shadow or obscenity so trivial and insignificant that it can have no effect and may be overlooked. In other words, treating with sex in a manner offensive to public decency and morality (and these are the words of our Fundamental Law), judged of by our National standards and considered likely to pander to lascivious, prurient or sexually procecious minds, must determine the result.... If the book in question has the tendency to corrupt tile morals of those in" whose hands the book may fall, then it would attract the provisions of Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code. The test would be what would be its effect on an ordinary member of the society. As the Supreme Court has said the book must have tendency to corrupt and deprive. The Magistrate as well as the learned Sessions Judge relied upon the evidence of p.w. 3 as well as on their own judgments. I have myself also examined the book and in my opinion, the conclusion of the Courts below on the obscenity of the book must be held to be unassailable. I would, therefore, reject the submissions made on behalf of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner in both these cases. I have myself also examined the book and in my opinion, the conclusion of the Courts below on the obscenity of the book must be held to be unassailable. I would, therefore, reject the submissions made on behalf of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner in both these cases. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners in each of the revision application then urged that at least the Petitioners should be dealt with in accordance with Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and instead of sentencing them to be released entering into a bond.,Admittedly neither the Magistrate nor the Sessions Judge has applied his mind to the provisions contained in Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and a revisional Court can exercise the said power in view of Sub-section (4) of Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. But the language of the Section indicates that a person convicted cannot claim the benefit of Section as of right. The exercise of the power is entirely in the discretion of the Court to be exercised according to the circumstances of each case. Sections 360 and 361 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are indeed reformatory measures and have been engrafted into the statute to carry out the object of reformation' and give the accused persons a chance of reformation. But at the same time the Courts should not allow themselves to be misled into applying the Section by misplaced leniency and sympathy. Court should always guard in this respect against the danger to the public and danger to the accused himself that may result from a misplaced leniency. Generally the power has to be exercised in those cases where the offenders without being persons of deprived character, may have to succumb to certain temptation or uncontrollable impulse, or have one a thoughtless act or were at the time of the offence acting under the influence of others. Having applied my mind to the facts and circumstances of the present case, lam of the opinion that the offence in question is an act of a reprehensible nature and by such act of the accused several young men go astray. Such act is deliberate and has degenerating impact on the society and the accused must be held to be fully able to appreciate his action and its consequences. Such act is deliberate and has degenerating impact on the society and the accused must be held to be fully able to appreciate his action and its consequences. In this view of the matter, I am not inclined to apply the provisions of Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 8. In the result, the revisions fail and are accordingly dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed