PANKAJ BHANDARI,J. - (1.) Petitioner has preferred this revision petition aggrieved by judgement and order dated 06.04.2015 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.4, Bharatpur, whereby petitioner has been convicted for offence under Section 279, 337 and 304-A of I.P.C. and has been sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, on non payment of fine, to further undergo 15 days simple imprisonment for offence under section 279 IPC. and six months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, on non payment of fine to further undergo 15 days simple imprisonment for offence under section 337 IPC. and two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 9,000/-, on non payment of fine, to further undergo two months simple imprisonment for offence under section 304A IPC.
(2.) After arguing at some length, counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner was a young boy who was not a professional driver, hence, his case should have been considered for release on probation under Section 360 Cr.P.C., 1973
(3.) Counsel for the petitioner does not press the revision petition on merits, his contention is that petitioner be given benefit of probation or the sentence be reduced. In this regard, counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on "Gulzar v. State of M.P." 2007 Cr.L.R. (SC)-378, "Bhanwar Lal v. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor" Criminal Revision Petition No.92/2003, decided by the Rajasthan High Court on 18.07.2017, "State through Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti Corruption Branch, Chandigarh v. Sanjiv Bhalla and Anr.," (2015) 13 Supreme Court Cases 444, "Paul George v. State of NCT of Delhi" (2008) 4 Supreme Court Cases 185 & "Abdul Jabbar v. State of Rajasthan," Criminal Revision Petition No.80/2001, decided by Rajasthan High Court on 31.01.2013.;