SNEHALATA MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in the instant criminal revisional application along with others has been facing her trial before the learned Additional sessions Judge, Fast Track, 4th Court, Krishnagar, Nadia of a charge under section 14a of the Foreigners Act. During the course of recording of evidence of prosecution witnesses an application was filed on behalf of the petitioner praying for pleading guilty. However, the learned Trial court rejected the said application, hence this criminal revision.

(2.) FROM perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned judge rejected the application of the petitioner, whereby she intends to plead guilty on the following grounds;

(3.) MS. Tanusree Ghosh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner relied upon two decisions, one of the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Sukhdeo Singh and Anr, reported in 1992 SCC (Cri) 705 as well as on a Division Bench decision of Allahabad High Court relating to the case of Ram Kishun v. State of uttar Pradesh, reported in 1996 Criminal Law Journal 440 and submitted the plea of guilty can be taken at any stage of trial after framing of charge. She further submitted the facts the accused pleaded not guilty at the time of framing of charge cannot operate as a bar in taking a plea of guilty at any subsequent stage. She further submitted the impugned order is wholly illegal and is thus liable to be set aside and the petitioner be permitted to plead guilty. On the other hand, Mr. Joy Sengupta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted before this Court that although the plea of guilty can be taken at any stage of the trial after framing of charge but contended it is entirely the discretion of the Court to accept such plea or not.