BABUSING VIRSING THAKORE Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is true that the plea is required to be recorded in the words of the accused. It is also true that in the instant case, charge is not framed. However, from the judgment of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, it transpires that the accused was explained and read over as to what offence he has committed and was then asked whether he pleads guilty. His answer is "I do not plead guilty". The question is whether in view of this question put by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, is it clear that all the contents and ingredients constituting an offence were brought to the notice of the accused and whether the accused was also made to understand the conclusions of his pleading guilty. From the first line of the judgment of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, it is clear that all the facts constituting the offence placed on record are read out and explained to the accused and the accused pleads guilty. It cannot be said that what the learned Metropolitan Magistrate recorded is not proper and the petitioner accused was not explained and told about the facts which constitute an offence and that his plea is not recorded according to law. The present case against the accused was tried as a summary trial. In summary trials specific charge against accused is not required to be framed. Therefore, not framing of specific charge is not an illegality or an impropriety. Under summary procedure what is required to be explained for recording the plea of the accused has been explained and the plea is recorded. I do not therefore find any substance in the argument of the learned Advocate for the petitioner that the plea is not properly recorded.

(2.) The learned Advocate for the petitioner further contended that the plea is recorded on the very day on which the charge-sheet is submitted. I do not find any impropriety or illegality in recording the plea on the day on which the charge- sheet is filed. Unless there is anyting on record to show that the accused asked for time to read and understand the allegations made out in the papers of charge-sheet which constitutes an offence and such time is refused by the court. In all other cases, it may be that the accused may not intend to further delay his trial and get the matter disposed of simply because, the plea is recorded on the day on which the charge-sheet is submitted cannot necessarily lead to infer that there was bargain in recording the plea. Even at the appellage stage, the petitioner accused has not alleged that there was a bargain in recording the plea and he has accordingly pleaded guilty. I therefore do not find any substance in this contention of the petitioner that there was a plea bargain in the instant case. Rule discharged.