Delhi District Court
Dharambir vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 12 January, 2012
ID No.02406E0004392012
IN THE COURT OF SH. VINAY KUMAR KHANNA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE04
SOUTH EAST: SAKET COURTS: DELHI
Criminal Appeal No. 01/2012
ID No.02406E0004392012
Dharambir ,
S/o Sh. Omni ,
R/o A273, JJ colony,
Nangloi, Delhi ........Appellant
Versus
The State (NCT of Delhi) ........Respondent
Instituted on : 09th January, 2012
Argued on : 12th January , 2012
Decided on : 12th January , 2012
ORDER
This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 04.01.2012 passed by Sh. D. R. Sehgal, Special Metropolitan Magistrate, (Spl. MM) Mobile CourtII, New Delhi, whereby appellant is convicted u/s 5(5) of the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 and ordered to be kept in certified institution in accordance with Section 5(5) of the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 (herein after to be referred as the 'Act') for a period of one year.
2. I have heard submissions advanced by D. N. Sharma , Learned Counsel for appellant as well as by Sh. WasiUrRehman, Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State/Respondent and have perused the trial court record carefully.
3. During argument, Ld. Counsel for the appellant has not disputed the conviction of the appellant U/s 5(5) of the Act. However, in view of the circumstances, it is prayed that accused may be released. Ld. Counsel submits that appellant is 40 years of age and belongs to a very poor family. He is deaf and dumb and partially blind and that he may be given an opportunity to Dharambir vs. StateCA No.02/12 1/2 ID No.02406E0004392012 rehabilitate himself in the society. He is not a previous convict and is lodged in certified institution since 04.01.2012 In view of the provision of Section 5 of the Act, it was desirable to release the appellant after due admonition. There is nothing on record to show that the learned trial court was satisfied that the appellant was likely to beg again. On considering the totality of aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court is satisfied that the appellant should be released after due admonition. Therefore, conviction of the appellant is upheld, but sentence is modified. Appellant is ordered to be released after due admonition on his executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,000/ that he shall abstain from begging and be of good behaviour.
Appellant has furnished personal bond. He be released. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. Trial court record be sent back along with a copy of this order. Appeal file be consigned to record room.
announced in the
open court on (Vinay Kumar Khanna)
12 January, 2012 Additional Sessions Judge04(SE)
th
Saket Court/New Delhi
Dharambir vs. StateCA No.02/12 2/2
ID No.02406E0004392012
Dhrambir Vs. State
CA No. 02/2012
12.01.2012
Present : Sh. D. N. Sharma, Ld. Counsel for appellant.
Appellant produced from Nirmal Chhaya .
Heard.
Vide separate order announced in the open Court, appeal stands disposed off. Trial court record be sent back along with a copy of this order.
Appeal file be consigned to record room.
(Vinay Kumar Khanna) Additional Sessions Judge 04 (SE) Saket : New Delhi : 12.01.2012 Dharambir vs. StateCA No.02/12 3/2