Delhi District Court
Devi Ram @ Devi Rai @ Budhi vs . State on 30 August, 2008
-:1:-
C.A. NO. 50/08
Devi Ram @ Devi Rai @ Budhi Vs. State
IN THE COURT OF SH. B. R. KEDIA,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE: DELHI.
C.A. NO. 50/08
Devi Ram @ Devi Rai @ Budhi,
S/O Gosain @ Ghusan @ Nathi,
........Appellant
Versus
The State
........Respondent
Date of institution 23.08.2008.
Arguments heard on 30.08.2008
Order delivered on 30.08.2008.
O R D E R :-
By virtue of this order I shall dispose of instant criminal appeal, which is directed against the order dt. 11.06.2008 as passed by Ld. M.M. in a case bearing No. 1452/08, U/S 5 (5) Bombay Prevention of Begging Act -:2:- C.A. NO. 50/08 Devi Ram @ Devi Rai @ Budhi Vs. State (in short to be referred hereinafter as B.P.B. Act), case titled "State Vs. Devi Ram", whereby Ld. M.M. was pleased to convict the accused Devi Ram U/S 5 (5) B.P.B. Act on his pleading guilty and passed order for detention of the convict in certified institution for one year. So by being aggrieved against the said order of the Ld. M.M., this convict has preferred this appeal.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution as found reflected from the T.C.R. is that on 08.06.2008 at about 4 : 30 P.M at Main Market, Paharganj, Delhi, the accused Devi Ram was found begging from the passersby. On the basis of said accusation notice U/S 251 Cr. P.C. was served to the accused vide order dt. 11.06.2008 and on voluntarily pleading guilty by the accused, Ld. M.M. was pleased to pass the impugned order dt. 11.06.2008, which -:3:- C.A. NO. 50/08 Devi Ram @ Devi Rai @ Budhi Vs. State is assailed in this appeal.
3. I have heard Sh. D. N. Sharma, Adv. Ld. Counsel for the appellant, Ld. APP for the State and perused the relevant material as available on the case record. 4 At the outset it is humbly submitted by Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the appellant does not want to challenge the conviction part and hence I confirm the said part of the impugned order dt. 11.06.2008.
5. However, the main grievances of the appellant is targeted towards the part of sentence. It is humbly submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the appellant is a poor man aged about more than 60 years and is the first offender and has not been involved in any other -:4:- C.A. NO. 50/08 Devi Ram @ Devi Rai @ Budhi Vs. State case. It is further added by Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the appellant has already been under confinement since 08.06.2008 till date. It is also added by the ld. Counsel that the appellant will be duly taken care of by his Son-in-law Ashok and he will not indulge in any such activities in future and a supporting affidavit of said Ashok, who is Son-in-law of the appellant has been placed on record and said Ashok reiterated about the same before me. It is also added by the Ld. counsel that after being released, the appellant will go back to his native village and will join his family members, who are residing there. Thus, Ld. Counsel for the appellant urged for taking lenient consideration. Ld. APP, however, submitted that appropriate order may be passed.
-:5:-C.A. NO. 50/08
Devi Ram @ Devi Rai @ Budhi Vs. State
6. Considering the aforesaid submission from both the sides and specifically keeping in mind the confinement period of this appellant and nature of offence for which he was found convicted on his voluntarily pleading guilty, I consider it expedient in the interest of justice to modify the sentence of confinement of the appellant, for the period as already undergone by him. It is therefore, directed that the appellant be released forthwith from the Certified Institution in which he has been detained in pursuance of the order dt. 11.06.2008 of Ld. M.M. The In-charge of the concerned Certified Institution be intimated accordingly.
7. The net result is that while maintaining the conviction part, the sentence part relating to the impugned order dt. 11.06.2008 stand modified in the light of the aforesaid observation and appeal is allowed to the said -:6:- C.A. NO. 50/08 Devi Ram @ Devi Rai @ Budhi Vs. State extent.
8. Let a copy of this order along with the TCR be transmitted to the court of concerned Ld. M.M. and a copy of this order be given dasti to Ld. Counsel for the appellant, at his request, for delivering the same to the In- charge, Certified Institution, Delhi for its compliance and after doing the needful by the Ahlmad of this court, this appeal file be consigned to Record Room. Announced in the open court (B. R. KEDIA) 30th August, 2008. Addl. Sessions Judge Tis Hazari Courts Delhi.