Delhi District Court
Hukum Chand vs . State on 24 July, 2008
-:1:-
C.A. NO. 38/08
Hukum Chand Vs. State
IN THE COURT OF SH. B. R. KEDIA,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE: DELHI.
C.A. NO. 38/08
Hukum Chand,
S/O Sukh Lal,
........Appellant
Versus
The State
........Respondent
Date of institution 11.07.2008.
Arguments heard on 24.07.2008
Order delivered on 24.07.2008.
O R D E R :-
By virtue of this order I shall dispose of instant criminal appeal, which is directed against the order dt. 13.6.2008 as passed by Ld. M.M. in a case bearing No. 1556/08, U/S 5 (5) Bombay Prevention of Begging Act -:2:- C.A. NO. 38/08 Hukum Chand Vs. State (in short to be referred hereinafter as B.P.B. Act), case titled "State Vs. Hukum Chand", whereby Ld. M.M. was pleased to convict the accused Hukum Chand 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 12.06.2008 at about 11:50 a.m in front of Bangla Sahib, Delhi, the accused Hukum Chand 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. 13.06.2008 and on voluntarily pleading guilty by the accused, Ld. M.M. was pleased to pass the impugned -:3:- C.A. NO. 38/08 Hukum Chand Vs. State order dt. 13.06.2008, which is assailed in this appeal.
3. I have heard Ms. Preeti Gupta, 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. 13.06.2008.
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 70 years and is the first offender and has not been involved in any other case. It is -:4:- C.A. NO. 38/08 Hukum Chand Vs. State further added by Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the appellant has already been under confinement since 12.06.2008 till date. It is also added by the Ld. counsel that after being released, the appellant will be taken care by his wife Smt. Vidya Devi and a supporting affidavit of said Smt. Vidya Devi has been placed on record and said Smt. Vidya Devi reiterated about the same before me. Thus, Ld. Counsel for the appellant urged for taking lenient consideration. Ld. APP, however, submitted that appropriate order may be passed.
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 -:5:- C.A. NO. 38/08 Hukum Chand Vs. State 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. 13.06.2008 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. 13.06.2008 stand modified in the light of the aforesaid observation and appeal is allowed to the said 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 -:6:- C.A. NO. 38/08 Hukum Chand Vs. State appellant, at her 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) 24th July, 2008. Addl. Sessions Judge Tis Hazari Courts 5 Delhi.