STATE OF H P Vs. BALAK RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DURING the course of arguments, it has been brought to the notice of the Court that accused/respondents 1,4 and 5 have already died. As such, criminal appeal in respect of those accused/respondents is abated. While going through the record, we find that examination of the accused-respondents, under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has not been recorded properly. Therefore, it was quite difficult, if not impossible, for the accused-respondents to understand what was the case against them and how should they be explaining the same. Questions put to the respondents are not in proper sequence, because of which the respondents can take the plea, if convicted, that they had not been afforded effective opportunity to explain the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution evidence.

(2.) SECTION 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is an enabling provision. The object is to enable the accused to explain every circumstance appearing against him, in prosecution evidence. Circumstances are required to be put in the form of questions, in proper sequence, and when questioning is not in proper sequence that is bound to create confusion in the mind of any person, leave alone a person standing criminal trial, who is supposed to be under stress.

(3.) WE are of the considered view that in case we dispose of the appeal, on the basis of the record, including examination of the accused-respondents as it is on record and ultimately hold the respondents guilty, the judgment would be liable to be set aside by our superior Court, on this ground alone that the accused- respondents had not been properly examined, under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and that improper examination amounted to denial of opportunity to explain away the circumstances appearing against them, in the prosecution evidence.