Kerala High Court Denies Relief To Petitioner Suppressing Facts, Orders Enquiry Into Allotment Of Govt Scheme Houses On Puramboke Land Candidate Missing Physical Test For Minor Illness Has No Enforceable Right To Rescheduling: Supreme Court Prolonged Incarceration And Parity Constitute Valid Grounds For Regular Bail: Supreme Court Accused In Cheque Bounce Cases Cannot File Evidence-In-Chief By Affidavit Under Section 145 NI Act: Orissa High Court Borrowers Have No Right To Personal Hearing Before Fraud Classification, But Full Forensic Audit Report Must Be Supplied: Supreme Court Pendency Of Matrimonial Dispute With General Allegations Not A Valid Ground To Deny Public Employment: Allahabad High Court Minimum Five Persons Mandatory To Prove 'Preparation For Dacoity' Under Section 399 IPC: Gujarat High Court Suit For Specific Performance Not Maintainable Without Prayer To Set Aside Termination Of Agreement: Madras High Court Trial Court Must Indicate Material Forming Basis Of Charge, Mechanical Framing Of Charges Impermissible: Madhya Pradesh High Court Voluntary Retirement Deemed Accepted If Positive Order Of Refusal Is Not Communicated Within Notice Period: Supreme Court Court Cannot Convict One Accused And Acquit Another On Same Evidence: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Due To Unreliable Last-Seen Evidence And Principle Of Parity 138 NI Act | Accused Cannot Rebut Presumption Of Legally Enforceable Debt At Pre-Trial Stage In Cheque Bounce Cases: Supreme Court More Meritorious PWD Candidates From Reserved Categories Can Claim Unreserved PWD Posts In Open Competition: Supreme Court Meritorious Reserved Candidates Can Claim Unreserved Horizontal Vacancies Based On Merit: Supreme Court Employee Not Entitled To Gratuity Until Conclusion Of Both Departmental And Criminal Proceedings: Supreme Court Stamp Duty Recovery Against Legal Heirs Is Strictly Limited To The Extent Of Inherited Estate: Allahabad High Court Single Lathi Blow On Head During Sudden Altercation Amounts To Culpable Homicide Under Section 304 Part II IPC, Not Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Habeas Corpus Maintainable For Child Custody Against Father; Cannot Be Dismissed Merely Due To Alternate Remedy: Allahabad High Court "Plea Of Ignorance In Digital Era Inexcusable": Punjab & Haryana HC Imposes Rs 10K Cost On Accused For Hiding Prior Bail Dismissal Discrepancies In Name And Age On Monthly Pass Fail To Establish 'Bona Fide Passenger' Status In Railway Accident Claim: Delhi High Court "Last Seen" Theory A Weak Link If Time Gap Is Wide: Bombay High Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Life For Murder Failure To Conduct Pre-Anaesthetic Check-Up Prima Facie Amounts To Gross Medical Negligence Under Section 304A IPC: Kerala High Court Gujarat High Court Bans AI From Judicial Decision-Making, Lays Down Strict Policy for Court Use of Artificial Intelligence

Failure to Question Accused Under Section 313 of CrPC Leads to Vitiating Trial: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 11 May 2023 , In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, held that the failure to properly question an accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) can result in the trial being vitiated.

The case involved an appeal filed by an accused challenging his conviction and sentence under Section 302 read with 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by the Trial Court, which was upheld by the High Court.

Importance of Section 313 of CrPC: The Court emphasized the significance of Section 313, which requires the Trial Court to question the accused to enable them to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against them.

Precedents Cited: The Court referred to several landmark judgments, including Tara Singh v. State, Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra, S. Harnam Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.), Asraf Ali v. State of Assam, Samsul Haque v. State of Bihar, Vahitha v. State of Tamil Nadu, and Satyavir Singh v. State.

Material Circumstances and Prejudice: The Court noted that the failure to put material circumstances to the accused in their statement under Section 313 of CrPC amounts to a serious irregularity. If such irregularity causes prejudice to the accused, it can vitiate the trial.

Lack of Evidence Against the Appellant: In the present case, the Court found that there was only one sentence in the evidence against the appellant, and the appellant was not confronted with this allegation during their examination under Section 313 of CrPC.

Passage of Time: Considering that more than 27 years had passed since the incident took place, the Court held it would be unjust to remand the case for further statement under Section 313 of CrPC.

Role of Section 313(5) of CrPC: The Court highlighted the importance of Section 313(5), which allows the Trial Court to take the assistance of the prosecutor and defense counsel in preparing relevant questions for the accused, minimizing errors and omissions.

Need for Attention to Section 342: The Court expressed disappointment at the continued disregard for Section 342 of CrPC and called for the National and State Judicial Academies to address this issue.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant. The Court directed the respondent to release the appellant unless their detention was required in connection with any other case.

Case Title: Raj Kumar @ Suman Vs State (NCT of Delhi)

DATE OF DECISION: May 11, 2023

Latest Legal News