JUDGMENT 1. - This revision petition has been preferred against the impugned order dated 10.2.99 passed by the learned Special Judge (Communal Riots/Man Singh Murder Case), Jaipur in Criminal Appeal No. 33/99 whereby the petitioner's appeal preferred against the conviction recorded by the trial court vide its order dated 24.2,96 for the offence under section 456 and 354 IPC for which the petitioner was sentenced simple imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs. 200/- was upheld. 2. The brief facts are that on a complaint lodged by one Shambhu Ram (Non-petitioner No. 2) FIR No. 320/91 came to be registered with Police to Station, Jhotwara, Jaipur. After completion of the investigation, the police filed charge sheet in the court of ACJM, No 7, Jaipur City, Jaipur and the petitioner was put to trial and the learned Magistrate after framing charges directed trial. The petitioner pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, 3. The prosecution examined as many as 6 witnesses including himself as 15 P.W. 1, PW. 2 Rameshwar PW 3 Prabhati, P.W. 4 Smt. Soni, P.W. 5 Hiranjan Singh. P.W. 6 Ram Sahai and PW. 7 Shasi Lal. The petitioner was examined under Section 313 Cr.PC. but he did not produce any evidence in support of his case. He was consequently held guilty by the trial court for the offences under section 456 and 354 IPC and sentenced him in the manner indicated above. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not pressed the petition on the point of conviction but has only prayed that a lenient view be taken in the matter having regard to the fact that the petitioner is the first offender and should have been extended the benefit of probation as per the provisions of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act read with Section 360 Cr.PC., 1973. In my view the question as regard the commission of offence by the accused, the same are squarely proved by the evidence led by the prosecution on record since the statement of the complainant is fully corroborated with the evidence of the independent witnesses, yet having regard to the fact that the petitioner is a first offender and had already undergone more than one and a half months of actual detention, I deem it appropriate that instead of directing him to undergo the remaining period of sentence he should be extended the benefit of probation since the maximum punishment imposed upon the petitioner pertains to his conviction does not exceed beyond three years, which is relevant for deciding the case, pertaining to the benefit of probation which should be extended in appropriate and deserving cases. In this case the since the maximum sentence which is to be imposed on the petitioner is only three months out of which he had already undergone half of the sentence. 5. It is accordingly directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail on his finishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with one sound and substantial surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Magistrate. He may be released forthwith in case not wanted in any other case. The record be sent back immediately.With the above observations, the revision petition stands disposed of.Revision disposed as per above observation. *******