RAJESH SAINI Vs. BEENA DEVI
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Click here to view full judgement.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED,J. -
(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 5.9.2006 whereby the petitioner's application for leading defence evidence was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner had already pleaded guilty at the time of notice under Section 251 Cr.PC. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that initially the petitioner had submitted that he did not plead guilty and claimed trial. Immediately, thereafter, he submitted that he pleaded guilty and was ready to make the payment. Both the statements of pleading guilty as well as not guilty were endorsed by the petitioner by affixing his finger impression.
(2.) Considering the fact that the petitioner had first pleaded not guilty and claimed trial and then immediately turned round and pleaded guilty and offered to make the payment but now again he wants to plead not guilty, it would be appropriate that the petitioner be given a fair trial. The impugned order is set aside. The matter shall now be proceeded as if the petitioner had pleaded not guilty and that he had claimed trial.
(3.) This petition stands disposed of.
Petition disposed of.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.