Delhi District Court
State vs . Pintu Dhep on 27 January, 2010
:1:
FIR No.47/09
State vs. Pintu Dhep
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANDEEP GARG, MM (CENTRAL)-05,
DELHI
State Vs. Pintu Dhep
FIR No. : 47/09
U/S : 3/4/5/8 ITP Act
PS : Kamla Market
JUDGMENT
a The Sl. No. of the case : 1744/3
b The date of commission of offence : 15.04.2009
c The date of institution of the case : 09.06.2009
d The name of complainant : Insp. Bala Sharma
e Name & address of accused : Pintu Dhep s/o Sh.
: Hilan Dhep r/o
: Kotha no.52, IInd
: Floor, GB Road,
: Delhi.
f The offence complained of : 4/5 ITP Act
g The plea of accused : Pleaded guilty
h Arguments heard on : 27.01.2010
i The final order : Convicted
j The date of Judgment : 27.01.2010
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION:
1. Accused Pintu Dhep has been sent to face trial for offence U/s 3/4/5/8 ITP Act with the allegations that on 15.04.2009 at about 9:00 PM at baranda Kotha no.52, GB Road, Kamla Market, Delhi he acted as a tout or pimp on behalf of prostitute Reshma and was found to be living on the earnings of prostitute Reshma. Investigation was carried out.
2. Upon completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed on 09.06.2009. Charge U/s 4/5 ITP Act was framed upon the accused to which Page 1 of 3 :2: FIR No.47/09 State vs. Pintu Dhep he pleaded not guilty & claimed trial. However, during the pendency of the trial, the accused has admitted the prosecution case. The accusations have been explained to the accused and he has been warned about the consequences. Despite warning, the accused insisted on his plea. It is held in State of Maharastra Vs. Dhruwa Wollen Mills Pvt. Ltd. 1991 Cr.L.J. 3141 (Bom.) that:-
"if the substance of occupation is properly explained to the accused and the accused understands fully the implication of the charge and pleads guilty, the Magistrate can record such plea and convict the accused on accepting such plea. But if the accused is not present before the Magistrate and does not plead guilty, the plea of guilty by other accused on his behalf, is illegal."
3. In view of the admission of the accused, he is convicted for offence U/s 4/5 ITP Act.
Announced in the open (Sandeep Garg) Court on 27.01.2010 MM(Central)-05, Delhi.
Page 2 of 3 :3: FIR No.47/09
State vs. Pintu Dhep ORDER ON POINT OF SENTENCE I have heard, Ld. APP for State and the accused on point of sentence. Accused submits that he is a sole bread earner in the family and has to look after his children.
Heard. Considering the socio-economic condition of the accused and the fact that the accused has family to be looked after and he wants to repent, accused is sentenced to Imprisonment already undergone. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open (Sandeep Garg) Court on 27.01.2010 MM(Central)-05, Delhi.
Page 3 of 3