A complaint under section 18/33/34 of the Lahore Development Authority Act, 1975, on the charge of illegal possession of the plots was filed against Nazar Khan, petitioner. The trial Court framed charge under section 33/34, of L.D.A. Act, 1975 against him and he was asked as to whether or not he pleads guilty and the trial Court straightaway convicted him under section 33/34/18 of the L.DA.
Act, 1975.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the petitioner had pleaded guilty, the trial Court was obliged to give him further notice asking him to show cause why he should not be convicted on the admission of guilt made by him. No one has appeared for the State.
3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel with care. I agree with him. The provisions of section 243, Cr.P.C. May be reproduced advantageously:-- Section 243. Cr.P.C."If the accused admits that he has committed the offence with which he is charged, his admission shall be recorded as nearly as possible in the words used by him; and if he shows no sufficient cause why he should not be convicted, the Magistrate may convict him accordingly."
The plain reading of the aforesaid provision of law will show that the accused could not have been straightaway convicted on his pleading guilty and the trial Court was obliged to give him opportunity to show cause as to why he should not be convicted. This being the position, there is no option but to accept this'' revision and set aside the conviction and sentence of the petitioner.
4. Now the question arises as to whether or not the case should be sent for retrial. I feel that in view of the nature of the case, it would not be proper to make the petitioner shuttlecock and direct retrial. He shall be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case.