ORDER :

Farjand Ali, J.

The criminal revision petition is barred by limitation from 7 days. An application under Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT has been filed. For the grounds and reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The delay in filing the revision petition is condoned. The revision petition be treated to be filed within limitation.

2. The instant criminal revision petition under Section 397 /401 of the Cr.P.C has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved of the judgment dated 10.05.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.6, Bikaner in Criminal Appeal No.20/2023, whereby the learned appellate court while affirming the conviction of the petitioner for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC as recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner in Criminal Original Case No.8405/2022, reduced the sentence for each offence from 3 years' rigorous imprisonment to 2 years' rigorous imprisonment, while maintaining the fine amount of Rs.1,000/- and default sentence of 1 month's simple imprisonment and it was further ordered that the sentences shall run concurrently.

3. Bereft of elaborate details, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant criminal revision are that complainant Manoj Suthar submitted a written report to the SHO, Police Station Kotgate to the effect that he has an authorized service center of Maruti in the name of General Automobile. In the intervening night of 01.06.2022-02.06.2022, some unknown person burgled into the shop and stole an amount of Rs.50,000/- lying in the cash drawer and the said activity is recorded in the CCTV. On the aforesaid report, FIR No.168/2022 was registered and after usual investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the present petitioner for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC.

4. The Learned Magistrate framed charges against the petitioner for the above offences and upon denial of guilt by him, commenced the trial. During the course of trial, the prosecution in order to prove the offences, examined as many as 7 witnesses and exhibited 11 documents. The accused, upon being confronted with the prosecution allegations, in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C, denied the allegations and claimed to be innocent. No evidence was adduced from defence side. Then, after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Defence Counsel and upon meticulous appreciation of the evidence, learned trial court convicted the accused for offences under Sections 4 57 and 380 of the IPC vide judgment dated 12.04.2023. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, he preferred an appeal, which was partly allowed by the learned appellate court vide judgment dated 10.05.2023 while affirming the judgment of conviction and modifying the order of sentence. Hence, this revision petition is filed before this court.

5. After arguing the case on merits to some extent, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he will not assail conviction of the petitioner and confines his arguments to the alternative prayer of granting the benefit of probation to the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner is a young man aged 25 years. He has no criminal antecedents and it was the first criminal case registered against him. He is a poor person. This was one off incident and there is every possibility that the petitioner shall be reformed if he is given a chance. He has remained in custody for some days during trial and at present he is serving the sentence. With these submissions, learned counsel prays that by taking a lenient view, the petitioner may be given the benefit of probation.

6. Learned