Published on: 24 July 2023 at 14:30 IST
Court: Supreme Court
Citation: Asraf Ali v. State of Assam (2008)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 casts a duty on the court to put in an enquiry or trial questions to the accused for the purpose of enabling him to explain any of the circumstances appearing in the evidence against him. It follows as a necessary corollary therefrom that each material circumstance appearing in the evidence against the accused is required to be put to him specifically, distinctly and separately and failure to do so amounts to a serious irregularity vitiating trial, if it is shown that the accused was prejudiced.
22. The object of Section 313 of the Code is to establish a direct dialogue between the court and the accused. If a point in the evidence is important against the accused, and the conviction is intended to be based upon it, it is right and proper that the accused should be questioned about the matter and be given an opportunity of explaining it. Where no specific question has been put by the trial court on an inculpatory material in the prosecution evidence, it would vitiate the trial. Of course, all these are subject to rider whether they have caused miscarriage of justice or prejudice.
This Court also expressed a similar view in S. Harnam Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) [(1976) 2 SCC 819 : 1976 SCC (Cri) 324 : AIR 1976 SC 2140] while dealing with Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (corresponding to Section 313 of the Code). Non-indication of inculpatory material in its relevant facts by the trial court to the accused adds to the vulnerability of the prosecution case. Recording of a statement of the accused under Section 313 is not a purposeless exercise.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra
