1. Home
2. Legal News
3. Examination of accused under Section 313 CrPC is not a mere procedural formality: Supreme Court

Examination of accused under Section 313 CrPC is not a mere procedural formality: Supreme Court

Dated: May 30, 2021

                                                                                                                                                             -by Megha Bhatia

In a decision issued on May 28th 2021, the Supreme Court raised worry about the casual and superficial recording of statements under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The panel, which includes Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justice Aniruddha Bose, notes that the examination of an accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code cannot be seen as a mere procedural formality because it is founded on the fundamental concept of justice.

The court is required to question the accused fairly, with care and caution, according to the court.

The court made this point while rejecting an appeal filed by an accused who was convicted under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code.

The Trial Court found the appellants guilty of violating Sections 304B and 306 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to seven years in prison for the offense punishable under Section 304B and five years in jail for the offense punishable under Section 306 of the IPC. The decision of the Trial Court was upheld by the High Court.

        20. It is a matter of grave concern that, often, Trial Courts record the statement of an accused under Section 313, CrPC in a very casual and cursory manner, without specifically questioning the accused as to his defence. It ought to be noted that the examination of an accused under Section 313, CrPC cannot be treated as a mere procedural formality, as it is based on the fundamental principle of fairness. This provision incorporates the valuable principle of natural justice “audi alteram partem”, as it enables the accused to offer an explanation for the incriminatory material appearing against him. Therefore, it imposes an obligation on the part of the Court to question the accused fairly, with care and caution. The Court must put incriminating circumstances before the accused and seek his response. A duty is also cast on the counsel of the accused to prepare his defence, since the inception of the trial, with due caution, keeping in consideration the peculiarities of Section 304B, IPC read with Section 113- B, Evidence Act. 

The court also cited Section 232 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which states that, “if, after taking the evidence for the prosecution, examining the accused and hearing the prosecution and the defence on the point, the Judge considers that there is evidence that the accused committed the offence, the Judge shall record order of acquittal.

“Once the Trial Court decides that the accused is not eligible to be acquitted as per the provisions of Section 232, CrPC, it must move on and fix hearings specifically for ‘defence evidence’, calling upon the accused to present his defence as per the procedure provided under Section 233, CrPC, which is also an invaluable right provided to the accused. Existence of such procedural right cohesively sits with the rebuttable presumption as provided under Section 113B, Evidence Act”, the court added.