SUNDARAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above revision is directed against the order of conviction and sentence dated 23. 6. 94 in S. T. C. No. 2202 of 1994 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Poonamallee, convicting the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 75 of the Tamil Nadu City Police Act and punishing him with a fine of Rs. 250 on the basis of his pleading guilty.

(2.) THE petitioner was facing a trial for the offence punishable under Section 75 of the Tamil Nadu City Police Act with regard to an alleged occurrence said to have taken place on 23. 6. 94 at 9. 30 A. M. , when the petitioner was found in a drunken state and was using abusive words in the public place, and therefore, the petitioner was immediately arrested by the police and was produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, poonamallee, on the same day, where, the petitioner pleaded guilty. THErefore, the learned Magistrate, recorded his pleadings that he was guilty and convicted him under Section 75 of the Tamil Nadu City Police Act and imposed a fine of rs. 250, in default of which, to undergo two weeks simple imprisonment.

(3.) IN Chinnasamy, in RE, 1972 L. W. (Crl.) 146, mr. K. N. Mudaliyar, J. , has held as follows: ' The Magistrate ought to have recorded the substance of the accusation, read out to the accused and made the accused understand the implications of his pleading ' guilty' . This substance of the accusation ought to have been properly stated to the accused, and the plea of the accused also properly recorded. The entire proceedings against the accused have been marred by a hap-hazard and perfunctory recording. ' ' IN such cases, the Presidency Magistrate would do well, in the interests of justice, to exercise their judicial discretion and take up the case for further hearing after one day' s interval so that the accused may be enabled to contact either the lawyers or their relatives or friends for proper arrangements for their defence. IN a number of cases this Court is left with a preponderant feeling that the accused have had no chance of arranging for their defences. Such an unsatisfactory state of affairs may be easily ended by a proper exercise of judicial discretion on the part of the Presidency Magistrates by postponing the inquiry or trial by one day. '