NARAYAN SARKAR Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a Sessions Trial the present petitioner is the sole accused, who has been facing a charge under Sections 376/302/201 of the Indian Penal Code. In the said trial, the examination of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is already over.

(2.) Now, in the instant criminal revision the petitioner has challenged his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the grounds, the same is not in accordance with law. According to the petitioner there was no independent eye witness of the alleged incident even none has seen him to flee away from the place of occurrence. The defacto-complainant, the mother of the victim in her written complaint, nor in her examination-in-chief claimed to have seen the petitioner to slit her daughter's throat. Still the Learned Trial Court during the examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure put to him a question that the mother of the victim had seen him to cut her daughter's throat, which is absolutely illegal and as such the said question to be expunged from the records. Now, the question arises for decision in the instant criminal revision whether by putting such question, the Trial Court committed any illegality or not.

(3.) According to the provisions of Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is incumbent upon the Trial Court after the closer of the prosecution evidence to put to the accused, such circumstances appearing in the evidence against him so as to enable the accused to explain the same. It may be that either in the FIR or in her examination-in-chief the defacto-complainant has not claimed that she had seen the petitioner to kill her daughter by cutting her throat but fact remains it is the defence who in her cross-examination brought out from her that in her presence the accused cut the throat of her daughter. The statement of any witness made in his or her cross-examination does not fall beyond the definition of evidence, which he or she testified on oath before a Court of law. Since, any incriminating circumstance against an accused, if is disclosed during the cross-examination of any witness, the same can always be used against him to determine his guilt, the Learned Trial Court has not committed any mistake by drawing the attention of the petitioner to such piece of evidence during his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This criminal revision has no merit and accordingly stands dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. However, I make it clear that whatever has been observed by this Court hereinabove is to resolve the issue raised before it and the Trial Court must come to its conclusion as regards to the guilt or innocence of the accused independently and in accordance with law and without being anyway guided by the observation made hereinabove. Criminal Section is directed to deliver urgent Photostat certified copy of this Judgement to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.