The intention of the legislator was to add a provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. PC) which could allow the Accused to explain the elements against him without taking an oath. The legal provision of art. 313 Cr. The PC was inserted to comply with the constitutional mandate of Article 20 (3) of the Indian Constitution, which provides for the right not to incriminate oneself. Thus, to protect the accused against self-incrimination and to meet the criteria for a fair trial, Article 313 was inserted in Cr.PC
The purpose of the provisions of art. 313 of Cr. PC is to establish a direct speech between the court and the accused. Further, if a piece of prosecution evidence is important against the accused and the conviction is only intended to be based on it, it is just and appropriate that the accused be questioned and given the opportunity to explain it. As such, S.313 Cr. CP not only allows the court to question the accused at any time, but it also allows the accused to personally engage in a discussion with the court to explain their innocence.
In the case of ‘Mir Mohammad Omar against the State of West Bengal,1 Section 313 has been held to apply to all types of trials, whether warrant, subpoena or summary trial. It is important to note that before questions are put to the accused under section 313, the Court is required to ensure that the questions are fair and worded in a language that even an illiterate accused or ignorant is able to understand and respond. But if the accused is illiterate and does not understand the language of the court, it is the responsibility of the court to translate the questions into the language known to the accused. In addition, where the accused is a legal person, such as a business, a personal examination is not possible and, therefore, in such circumstances, the examination of an administrator or an authorized person of ‘a business is allowed.
As such, the purpose of the questioning of the accused under Article 313 Cr.PC was lucidly explained by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case ‘Sanatan Naskar and another vs. State of West Bengal ‘,2 where it was held that the object of the review is to establish a direct discussion between the Court and the accused and to test the veracity of the accusation. As such, the questioning of the accused is not a mere formality, and the questions asked of the accused and the answers given by the accused are important for the accused to prove his innocence.
In the case of ‘Dehal Singh versus. Himachal Pradesh State3, it was held that the statement of the accused u / s. 313 of the Cr.PC must be registered without making the accused take an oath. Therefore, a Section 313 statement cannot be considered evidence under Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
From reading the provisions inherent in Article 313, it would also be clear that the accused can be questioned at any stage of the proceedings, which includes even at the stage of the investigation. That is, before making the accusations. In addition, the Honorable Supreme Court in the case ‘Sharad Birdichand Sharda V. State of Maharashtra ‘4 held that the circumstances which were not presented to the accused during his questioning under section 313 of Cr. computer must be totally excluded from the examination since the accused has not had the opportunity to explain them and this cannot be used against him. Accordingly, the accused’s conviction was quashed in the said case. In addition, in the case of
‘Basavaraj r. Patil against. Collector State,5 the Apex Court has ruled that it is necessary in all cases that the accused answer the question put to him.
In all cases, it is essential that he responds to the question put to the accused while remaining personally present before the Court. However, if the Court finds that the statement of the accused cannot be recorded without delay, the Court may dispense with the presence of the accused and order counsel for the accused to record a statement on behalf of the accused. ‘accused.
In addition, if the questioning of an accused under Article 313 Cr.PC has already taken place, the Court may recall the accused to respond again to the incriminating circumstances. As such, there are no express conditions set forth in Cr. PC for recalling the accused again to answer further questions from the Court. It is established that the power to recall the accused twice for questioning under section 313 should not be routine or mechanical. In the case of
‘Rajan Dwivedi versus. CBI ‘6 it was decided that the Court ordering the accused to make his statement under Article 313 Cr.PC should make a detailed order and provide an explanation as to the reasons and reasons for the accused being redirected for make their statement in order to answer the question arising from the incriminating circumstances. It is also established in law that if new evidence is presented by the prosecution, the accused must be allowed for the second time to explain the evidence / circumstances against him.
Apart from the above, in cases where the accused has difficulty remaining in court, the accused, through his or her counsel, may file a separate application with an affidavit and request the exemption. of his personal appearance to record the statement. As such, the accused in the affidavit filed with the motion must categorically state the nature of the hardship caused and assure the Court that he will not plead prejudice by relying on a waiver of his presence. personal. On the other hand, the public prosecutor may at any time before the request is granted, raise its objection with the reasons why the said request should not be granted and the prejudice which could be caused to the public prosecutor if such a request is. welcomed.
From the established position of law, it is clear that the circumstances which, according to the prosecution, lead to proof of guilt against the accused must be presented to him in his questioning under section 313 Cr. computer7 ‘Therefore, in all investigations and trials, the purpose of Article 313 Cr.PC is to give the accused the opportunity to explain the elements incriminating him against him in the evidence presented by the accused. ‘charge. The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, but the provisions of Article 313 Cr.PC are not a mere formality. As such, the provisions of S. 313 Cr.PC act with a dual objective, on the one hand that all the material elements of the prosecution evidence must be presented to the accused in accordance with the law and On the other hand, the Court must give the accused the opportunity to explain his part of the defense or his version of the case. It is the obligatory duty of the Court to give the accused who has appeared before it the opportunity to have a fair trial. However, if the accused does not deliberately take the opportunity presented to him, the legal consequences must follow.
1 (1989) 4 SCC 436
2 AIR 2010 SC 3507.
3 2010 9 SCC 85).
4 (1984) 4 SCC 116
5 AIR 2000 SC 3214.
6 2008 Cri. LJ 1440).
7 Vikramjit Singh versus. State of Punjab ‘(2006 12 SCC 306).
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide on the subject. Specialist advice should be sought regarding your particular situation.