TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (11) TMI 1271
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat on 6.03.2005, Rajbir went to sleep in the street on a cot at about 7.30 p.m. and Daya Nand (PW-7) also went to sleep in his house at about 9.00 p.m. At 11.00 P.M., Daya Nand heard the sound of vomiting of his brother and he came out and found his brother Rajbir crying in pain. PW-7 called his father Chander Bhan and both of them noticed injuries on the forehead of Rajbir with profuse bleeding. PW-7 went to call the doctor but the doctor refused to accompany him. When Daya Nand returned back, Rajbir had already succumbed to injuries. Law was set in motion by PW-7 and FIR was registered Under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. PW-14 had taken up the investigation and inquest was conducted on the body of the deceased Rajbir. Dr. J.K. Bhalla (PW-10) conducted autopsy on the body of deceased Rajbir and a country-made bullet was seized from the occipital area of the brain of deceased Rajbir. Dr. Bhalla opined that the death was due to injury to the brain and he issued Ex P-13-post mortem certificate. Site plan of the scene of occurrence was prepared and material objects were seized. The Appellant-accused was arrested on 14.03.2005 and based on his confession statement, a pistol was reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o conducted post mortem on the body of the deceased Rajbir and recovery of a bullet from occipital area of the brain of deceased Rajbir; and (v) Opinion of the Ballistic Expert (Ext. P-12) that the country-made bullet (chambered for .315" & .303" caliber firearms) had been fired from the country-made pistol (chambered for .315 & .303 cartridges) recovered in pursuance of the disclosure statement of the accused and not from any other firearm. Trial court as well as the High Court held that the above circumstances are proved by the prosecution and that they form a complete chain establishing guilt of the accused resulting in conviction of the Appellant. While doing so, trial court relied upon the Forensic Science Laboratory Report (FSL) (Ex P-12) as a vital piece of evidence against the Appellant. The High Court also relied upon FSL report as a material evidence to sustain the conviction of the Appellant. 6. Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant, contended that none of the circumstances relied upon by the courts below had been established beyond reasonable doubt and those circumstances, either cumulatively or individually, were insufficient to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed put such questions to him as the Court considers necessary; (b) shall, after the witnesses for the prosecution have been examined and before he is called on for his defence, question him generally on the case: Provided that in a summons-case, where the Court has dispensed with the personal attendance of the accused, it may also dispense with his examination under Clause (b). (2). No oath shall be administered to the accused when he is examined Under Sub-section (1). (3). The accused shall not render himself liable to punishment by refusing to answer such questions, or by giving false answers to them. (4). The answers given by the accused may be taken into consideration in such inquiry or trial, and put in evidence for or against him in any other inquiry into, or trial for, any other offence which such answers may tend to show he has committed. (5). The Court may take help of Prosecutor and Defence Counsel in preparing relevant questions which are to be put to the accused and the Court may permit filing of written statement by the accused as sufficient compliance of this section. 10. There are two kinds of examination Unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nating circumstances before the accused and solicit his response. This provision is mandatory in nature and casts an imperative duty on the court and confers a corresponding right on the accused to have an opportunity to offer an explanation for such incriminatory material appearing against him. Circumstances which were not put to the accused in his examination Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be used against him and have to be excluded from consideration." (vide Sharad Birdichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116 and State of Maharashtra v. Sukhdev Singh (1992) 3 SCC 700. 13. In Basava R. Patil and Ors. v. State of Karnataka and Ors. (2000) 8 SCC 740, this Court considered the scope of Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure and in paras (18) to (20) held as under: 18. What is the object of examination of an accused Under Section 313 of the Code? The section itself declares the object in explicit language that it is "for the purpose of enabling the accused personally to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him". In Jai Dev v. State of Punjab (AIR 1963 SC 612) Gajendragadkar, J. (as he then was) speaking for a three-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spects of that case and it does not lay down the law of universal application as it had been decided on its own facts. 16. Undoubtedly, the importance of a statement Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, insofar as the accused is concerned, can hardly be minimised. The statutory provision is based on the rules of natural justice for an accused, who must be made aware of the circumstances being put against him so that he can give a proper explanation to meet that case. If an objection as to Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure statement is taken at the earliest stage, the Court can make good the defect and record additional statement of the accused as that would be in the interest of all. When objections as to defective Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure statement is raised in the appellate court, then difficulty arises for the prosecution as well as the accused. When the trial court is required to act in accordance with the mandatory provisions of Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, failure on the part of the trial court to comply with the mandate of the law, in our view, cannot automatically enure to the benefit of the accused. Any omission on the part of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stead, he must show that such non-examination has actually and materially prejudiced him and has resulted in the failure of justice. In other words, in the event of any inadvertent omission on the part of the court to question the accused on an incriminating circumstance cannot ipso facto vitiate the trial unless it is shown that some material prejudice was caused to the accused by the omission of the court. 20. The question whether a trial is vitiated or not depends upon the degree of the error and the accused must show that non-compliance of Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure has materially prejudiced him or is likely to cause prejudice to him. Merely because of defective questioning Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, it cannot be inferred that any prejudice had been caused to the accused, even assuming that some incriminating circumstances in the prosecution case had been left out. When prejudice to the accused is alleged, it has to be shown that accused has suffered some disability or detriment in relation to the safeguard given to him Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure Such prejudice should also demonstrate that it has occasioned failure of justice ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tly rejected the contention of the Appellant-accused in that regard. 23. When such objection as to omission to put the question Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure is raised by the accused in the appellate court and prejudice is also shown to have been caused to the accused, then what are the courses available to the appellate court? The appellate court may examine the convict or call upon the counsel for the accused to show what explanation the accused has as regards the circumstances established against him but not put to him Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure and the said answer can be taken into consideration. 24. In Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra (1973) 2 SCC 793, this Court considered the fallout of the omission to put a question to the accused on vital circumstance appearing against him and this Court has held that the appellate court can question the counsel for the accused as regards the circumstance omitted to be put to the accused and in para 16 it was held as under: ... It is trite law, nevertheless fundamental, that the prisoner's attention should be drawn to every inculpatory material so as to enable him ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the report not being put to him. Even otherwise, it was the duty of the Sessions Judge and/or the High Court, if they found that some vital circumstance had not been put to the accused, to put those questions to the counsel for the accused and get the answers of the accused. If the accused could not give any plausible or reasonable explanation, it would have to be assumed that there was no explanation. Both the Sessions Judge and the High Court have overlooked this position of law and failed to perform their duties and thereby wrongly acquitted the accused. 26. This Court has thus widened the scope of the provisions concerning the examination of the accused after closing prosecution evidence and the explanation offered by the counsel of the accused at the appeal stage was held to be a sufficient substitute for the answers given by the accused himself. 27. The point then arising for our consideration is, if all relevant questions were not put to accused by the trial court as mandated Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure and where the accused has also shown that prejudice has been caused to him or where prejudice is implicit, whether the appellate court is having th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the accused and the said answers shall be taken into consideration for deciding the matter. If the accused is unable to offer the appellate court any reasonable explanation of such circumstance, the court may assume that the accused has no acceptable explanation to offer; (ii) In the facts and circumstances of the case, if the appellate court comes to the conclusion that no prejudice was caused or no failure of justice was occasioned, the appellate court will hear and decide the matter upon merits. (iii) If the appellate court is of the opinion that non-compliance with the provisions of Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure has occasioned or is likely to have occasioned prejudice to the accused, the appellate court may direct retrial from the stage of recording the statements of the accused from the point where the irregularity occurred, that is, from the stage of questioning the accused Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure and the trial Judge may be directed to examine the accused afresh and defence witness if any and dispose of the matter afresh; (iv) The appellate court may decline to remit the matter to the trial court for retrial on account....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court to see that persons accused of crime must be given a fair trial and get speedy justice, in our view, every reasonable latitude must be given to those who are entrusted with administration of justice. In the facts and circumstances of each case, court should examine whether remand of the matter to the trial court would amount to indefinite harassment of the accused. When there is omission to put material evidence to the accused in the course of examination Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, prosecution is not guilty of not adducing or suppressing such evidence; it is only the failure on the part of the learned trial court. The victim of the offence or the accused should not suffer for laches or omission of the court. Criminal justice is not one-sided. It has many facets and we have to draw a balance between conflicting rights and duties. 33. Coming to the facts of this case, FSL Report (Ex-P12) was relied upon both by the trial court as well as by the High Court. The objection as to the defective 313 Code of Criminal Procedure statement has not been raised in the trial court or in the High Court and the omission to put the question Under Section 313 Code of Crim....