JUDGMENT

Sharma J (delivering oral judgment):

This is an appeal against sentence. The accused having pleaded guilty to the two charges against him under ss. 9(1)(b) and 10(2)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance 1952 could not, because of the provisions of s. 305 of the Criminal Procedure Code, appeal against his conviction. He has, however, asked the Court to exercise its revisionary powers, if necessary, and I see no reason why I should not act under s. 325(i) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The charges were read over and according to the record they were explained to and understood by the accused and he pleaded guilty thereto. He admitted the facts but in mitigation stated that the exhibits were not his and that they had been left behind by a friend of his. Proof of "possession" was the very essential ingredient of those offences and in spite of what the accused said the learned president found him guilty and convicted him on the two charges. A plea of guilty may be accepted by the Court and the accused convicted on it but the Court is not bound to accept a plea of guilty in all cases. The Court must carefully consider whether the accused has fully understood the nature of the c