JUDGMENT 1. - Accused-petitioner Panna Lal was convicted and sentenced in Criminal Case No. 121/2004 by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali as follows: Under Section 420 and 201, IPC : The accused-petitioner was given benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders' Act,1958 (for short 'P.O. Act') and he was asked to submit bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- for a period of six months. He was also asked to deposit Rs. 500/- as costs of the proceedings under Section 5 of P.O. Act. 2. Criminal Appeal No. 45/2011 was filed by accused Panna Lal in Sessions Court, Pali and his appeal was dismissed on 15.6.2012 and the judgment of the trial court was kept intact. 3. Now the accused-petitioner Panna Lal has filed this S.B. Criminal Revision under Section 397 read with Section 401, Cr.P.C. and during arguments, he has agreed that his conviction under Sections 420 and 201 IPC as well as benefit given to him under Section 4 of the P.O. Act is perfectly right but he has argued that the learned lower court should have given him the benefit of Section 12 of the P.O. Act in explicit words which has not been done by the trial court as well as the appellate court. 4. In the circumstances of the case, it is made explicit that the accused-petitioner Panna Lal will be entitled to get the benefit of Section 12 of the P.O. Act also as per the procedure and law. 5. The revision petition of the accused-petitioner is partly allowed as above and to that extent the judgments of the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,Pali as well as the learned Sessions Judge,Pali are upheld with the above modification. The stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.Petition disposed of. *******