ANAND BARDEWA Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this revision petition the accused, Anand Bardewa has challenged the order dated 27-3-1998 passed in the Criminal Case No. 136 of 1997 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East and North, Gangtok whereby the accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month for an offence under Section 380/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short I.P.C.).

(2.) In the present case, the accused pleaded guilty to the charges. Various grounds have been taken. The accused is very young and he did not understand the intent and purport of the charge. It is further alleged that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate failed to direct the accused to engage a lawyer at the State expense. He has also alleged that the prosecution has given assurance to the accused that they shall take a lenient view if the accused pleads guilty. After the case ended in conviction the complainant, Hemant Chettri stated that he had compromised the matter and he wants to withdraw the complaint. Offence under Section 380 IPC is not compoundable.

(3.) If proper safeguards are taken a plea of guilty to a capital charge can be accepted. Such safeguards must include the accused's representation by counsel who must be in a position to answer the questions of the Court, with regard to whether the accused knows what he is doing and the consequences of his plea.