Kasambhai Abdulrehmanbhai Sheikh v State of Gujarat

• The appellants were prosecuted for selling adulterated turmeric powder under S.16(1)(a)(i) read with S.7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. After some prosecution evidence, they pleaded guilty and the Magistrate imposed a nominal sentence. The circumstances, including a cyclostyled judgment and a plea entered although the sample had been treated as cancelled, led to the inference that the plea followed an assurance of leniency. The Gujarat High Court, acting suo motu, enhanced the sentence.

1. Whether a conviction based on a plea of guilty entered as a result of plea bargaining is valid.

• A conviction based on a plea of guilty entered as a result of plea bargaining with the prosecution and the Magistrate is unconstitutional and illegal. Such a procedure is unreasonable, unfair and unjust and violates Article 21 as interpreted in Maneka Gandhi. The High Court should have set aside the conviction. The Supreme Court did so and remanded the case to the Magistrate to proceed from the stage of the plea, ignoring it.

Plea bargaining may induce an innocent accused to plead guilty to avoid a long, costly and uncertain trial, and may deflect the judge from his duty. A conviction resting on such a plea fails the test of a fair, just and reasonable procedure under Article 21.