SC quashes murder conviction due to failure to confront accused with key allegation during Section 313 CrPC examination

The SC set aside the conviction of accused no.2 in a murder case where the only allegation was that he stood near a gate holding a country-made handgun while six co-accused entered the victim's house. The court found that during the Section 313 CrPC examination, the appellant was not confronted with this sole prosecution allegation despite 42 questions being asked. The court held that the conviction was vitiated due to this procedural lapse, as the appellant could not adequately defend against an allegation not properly put to him. The appeal was allowed and conviction quashed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Conviction under Section 302 read with Section 120-B of IPC.
2. Conviction under Section 307 read with Section 120-B of IPC.
3. Alleged failure to properly examine the accused under Section 313 of CrPC.

Summary:

Issue 1: Conviction under Section 302 read with Section 120-B of IPC
The appellant was convicted by the Sessions Court for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 120-B of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The High Court confirmed this conviction. The prosecution alleged that the appellant, along with others, conspired to murder Jawahar Lal (PW-3) and his relatives. The appellant was accused of standing near the gate of the gallery with a katta (country-made handgun) while the other accused entered PW-3's house and committed the crime.

Issue 2: Conviction under Section 307 read with Section 120-B of IPC
The appellant was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 120-B of IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. The prosecution claimed that the appellant and others attempted to murder PW-3 and PW-7, causing serious injuries. However, the only evidence against the appellant was the testimony of PW-5, who stated that the appellant was standing outside with a katta.

Issue 3: Alleged failure to properly examine the accused under Section 313 of CrPC
The appellant's counsel argued that the only circumstance against the appellant, standing outside with a katta, was not put to him during his examination under Section 313 of CrPC, causing grave prejudice and a failure of justice. The High Court did not consider this argument, although it was raised in the written submissions. The Supreme Court noted that the failure to put material circumstances to the accused amounts to a serious irregularity that can vitiate the trial if it prejudices the accused. The Court found that the appellant was not given an opportunity to explain the only incriminating circumstance against him, which resulted in a failure of justice.

Our View:
The Supreme Court held that the High Court's reliance on the testimony of PW-13 was misplaced as PW-13 did not mention the appellant. The only evidence against the appellant was from PW-5, which was not put to the appellant during his Section 313 CrPC examination. The Court emphasized the importance of properly examining the accused under Section 313 to enable them to explain any circumstances against them. The Court cited several precedents, including Tara Singh v. State and Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra, to support the view that the failure to properly examine the accused can vitiate the trial if it causes prejudice.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant's conviction was based on a single uncorroborated testimony that was not properly put to him for explanation, causing serious prejudice. Given the passage of 27 years since the incident and the appellant's incarceration for over 10 years, the Court found it unjust to remand the case for further examination. The Court set aside the appellant's conviction and sentence, directing his immediate release unless detained in connection with any other case. The Court also highlighted the need for judicial academies to address the issue of proper examination under Section 313 of CrPC.

---