Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

In Re vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 27 April, 2015

      IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJAY GARG, SPECIAL JUDGE 
       (NDPS), SOUTH­WEST DISTRICT, DWARKA COURTS, 
                        NEW DELHI. 

Criminal Revision No.64/2014
Unique ID No.02405R0240772014
In Re:
Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta,
S/o Sh. O. P. Gupta,
D­32, 60 Feet Road, Mahavir Enclave,
Palam Colony, New Delhi­110055.                                                          ....Petitioner

Versus
1.   Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
2.   The Commissioner,
      South Delhi Municipal Corporation,
      Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi.                 ....Respondents

                                  Date of institution     :    28.10.2014
                                  Date of reserving order :    16.04.2015
                                  Date of decision         :   27.04.2015
JUDGMENT:

1. This revision petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C. lays challenge to the order dated 19.07.2014 passed by the Special Metropolitan Magistrate whereby the petitioner was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1400/­ for commission of offences under CR No.64/2014 Page 1/4 Sections 357/397/321 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (for short, the Act).

2. The brief background relevant for the disposal of the petition is that on 14.07.2014, the petitioner, who is running a Chholey Bhature shop, was challaned under Sections 357/397 of the Act on the allegation that he was found keeping his trade material on road drain and throwing waste material on public place thereby causing insanitation and nuisance. Upon being served with the summons, the petitioner appeared before the Special Metropolitan Magistrate on 19.07.2014. On the said date, notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. for the commission of offences under Sections 357/397/321 of the Act was framed against the petitioner to which he pleaded guilty. The petitioner was accordingly convicted for the said offences and a total fine of Rs.1400/­ was imposed upon him. The fine was deposited by the petitioner on the same day.

3. The counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order dated 19.07.2014 on the ground that since the petitioner had not been summoned for the offence under Section 321 of the Act, the CR No.64/2014 Page 2/4 Court below erred in framing notice for the said section in the absence of any material in that regard. I am unable to agree. Section 321 (1) of the Act provides that no person shall, except with the permission of the Commissioner and on payment of such fee as he in each case thinks fit, place or deposit upon any street, or upon any open channel, drain or well in any street or upon any public place any stall, chair, bench, box, ladder, bale or other thing whatsoever so as to form an obstruction thereto or encroachment thereon. In the case on hand, it was alleged inter alia against the petitioner that he was keeping his material on the road drain. The said act would have certainly caused obstruction on the public street. In the absence of any permission from the Commissioner in that regard, the Court below rightly included Section 321 in the notice.

The counsel for the petitioner has further contended that upon the appearance of the petitioner before the Special Metropolitan Magistrate, his signatures were obtained on the printed proforma though he never intended to plead guilty in the matter. The contention is unsustainable. It is the settled law that the order sheet of the Court is the true and correct account of the proceedings that took place on a particular day. Once the CR No.64/2014 Page 3/4 petitioner himself signed the notice before the Special Metropolitan Magistrate, it does not now lie in his mouth to allege that he did not plead guilty.

Section 461 (2) of the Act provides that whoever contravenes the provisions of sub­section (1) of Section 321 in relation to any public street shall be punishable with simple imprisonment which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend to Rs.5,000/­ or with both. As far as offences under Sections 357 and 397 are concerned, they are punishable with fine of Rs.50/­ each. Since the petitioner pleaded guilty, a fine of Rs.1300/­ in respect of offence under Section 461 (2) and Rs.50/­ each qua offences under Sections 357 and 397 of the Act was imposed upon him. I find no irregularity or infirmity in the impugned order. The petition is devoid of any merit. The same is accordingly dismissed. 

Pronounced in the open court.               (SANJAY GARG)
Dated  : 27.04.2015                                Special Judge (NDPS),
                                                      South­West District, Dwarka Courts, 
                                                                           New Delhi.  




CR No.64/2014                                                                                   Page  4/4