ORDER : V. Ramkumar, J. 1. Petitioner, who is the sole accused in S.T.No.3785/1996 on the file of the J.F.C.M Court-III, Trivandrum, was prosecuted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kazhakoottam, for an offence punishable under Section 51 (a) of the Kerala Police Act 1960. The case of the prosecution was that the petitioner at about 4 PM on 11.12.1996 was found in a drunken state and uttered obscene words and was incapable taking care of himself under the influence of liquor on the public road near Kazhakkootam Police Station. After taking him into custody, the Sub Inspector of Police produced him before a Primary Health Centre, where the Doctor after examining him certified that he had consumed Alcohol and was under the influence of Alcohol. 2. When the particulars of the offence were read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded guilty before the Magistrate and thereupon he was sentenced to simple imprisonment for fifteen days and to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- and on default to pay the fine amount to suffer simple imprisonment for two days. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred a revision before the Sessions Court, Trivandrum. As per order dated 20.9.2001 passed by the First Addition Sessions Court, Trivandrum the learned Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the order observing that the petitioner's contention that he pleaded guilty because of the advise given to him by the Police and that he was ignorant of the law cannot be a valid defence. Hence this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Pubic Prosecutor. The petitioner claims himself to be a poor "Dalit" employee of Titanium Products, Trivandrum. Since the conviction and sentence passed by the courts below on the petitioner are liable to be dislodged for the simple reason that the petitioner was undefended before the learned Magistrate and the conviction and sentence were passed against him without providing the petitioner any legal assistance. It is shockingly strange that, the learned Sessions Judge did not notice that when the particulars of the offence were read over to the petitioner he was not defended by a lawyer of his choice and thereby he was deprived of his statutory as well as Constitutional rights. The conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge cannot be supported under any account. The conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge cannot be supported under any account. The order dated 20.9.2001 of the Additional Sessions Court and the judgment dated 12.12.1996 of the J.F.C.M Court-III, Trivandrum in S.T.No.3785/1996 are set aside and the conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below are dislodged and the petitioner shall be set at liberty forthwith.