https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308053 Section 313 CrPC requires every incriminating circumstance to be put to the accused so a meaningful explanation can be offered. Omission to confront the accused with a material circumstance does not by itself vitiate the trial; the controlling test is whether material prejudice or failure of justice has been caused. Where prejudice is shown, the appellate court may seek an explanation at the appellate stage or direct fresh examination/retrial from the stage at which the defect occurred. Here, the ballistic expert's report had not been specifically put to the accused, prejudice was found, and the conviction and sentence were set aside with the matter remitted for further proceedings from the statement stage. en-us Tue, 11 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 May 2023 09:34:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308053 Section 313 CrPC requires every incriminating circumstance to be put to the accused so a meaningful explanation can be offered. Omission to confront the accused with a material circumstance does not by itself vitiate the trial; the controlling test is whether material prejudice or failure of justice has been caused. Where prejudice is shown, the appellate court may seek an explanation at the appellate stage or direct fresh examination/retrial from the stage at which the defect occurred. Here, the ballistic expert's report had not been specifically put to the accused, prejudice was found, and the conviction and sentence were set aside with the matter remitted for further proceedings from the statement stage. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 11 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308053