Magistrate Must See If Accused Has Sufficient Legal Advice Before Pleading Guilty: Madras HC Sets Aside Order Dismissing Application Of Accused Persons To Contest Case On Merit
The Madras High Court set aside a Judicial Magistrate’s Order dismissing an application filed by the accused persons expressing their intention to contest the case on merits and held that the Magistrate must see if the accused persons understand the consequences and they have sufficient legal advice before they plead guilty.
The petition, in this case, was filed challenging the proceedings of the Judicial Magistrate where the accused persons were booked under the provisions of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice N.Anand Venkatesh asserted, “Where the punishment provided is quite serious, normally the Magistrates will not act upon the accused persons pleading guilty and will afford an opportunity to contest the case. Law on this issue is too well settled.”
Advocate R.Karunanidhi represented the Petitioners while Government Advocate (Crl. Side) B.Thanga Aravindh represented the Respondent.
Summons were issued to the petitioners as they were facing a private complaint initiated by the respondent for offences under Sections 51, 52(i), 58, 59(i) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. The petitioners appeared before the Magistrate and pleaded guilty. Based on the same, the Court below posted the case for passing final judgment. In the meantime, the petitioners filed the petition by expressing their intention to contest the case on merits and without knowing the consequence, they pleaded guilty. The Court below dismissed the application and posted the matter for pronouncing judgment. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners approached the High Court.
By an interim order, the High Court called for the records from the Judicial Magistrate to know whether the admission of guilt was voluntary or not, since it had been stated that no legal advice was given to the petitioner. The report received from the trial Court said nothing about the issue.
“In the considered view of this Court, it is not necessary for the learned Judicial Magistrate to straightaway act upon on the accused persons pleading guilty before the Court. The learned Magistrate must see if the accused persons understand the consequence and they have sufficient legal advice before they pleaded guilty”, the Bench held.
“Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioners on legal advice want to contest this case, the petitioners must be given an opportunity to contest the case on merits”, the High Court held while allowing the petition and directing the Court below to proceed further with the case by affording opportunity to the petitioners.
Cause Title: Sathish & Anandh v. Food Safety Officer [Case No. Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10665 of 2023]
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocate R.Karunanidhi
Respondent: Government Advocate (Crl. Side) B.Thanga Aravindh
