Brief Facts
- The Appellant was convicted for the murder of the deceased. The other three victims received stab injuries caused by a knife, which were also inflicted by the Appellant. FIR was lodged under sections 302 and 307, IPC. The post-mortem report recorded “stab injury to neck” of the victim as the probable cause of death.
- Upon completion of the investigation, a charge sheet under sections 302 and 307, IPC was filed before the concerned court against the Appellant.
- Trial Court convicted the Appellant which was further upheld by the High Court resulting in appeal before Supreme Court.
Issues
- Whether the written statement filed by the accused can be treated as part of statement of accused under section 313(5) Cr.P.C?
- Scope of Section 313 Cr.P.C.
- What are the necessary conditions for seeking benefit of exception 4 to section 300 of IPC?
Held
- The appeal was allowed to the extent that the conviction under section 302 IPC was altered to conviction under Section 304 Part II.
Principles pertaining to examination of accused u/s 313 of the CrPC
a. Section 313, Cr. P.C. [clause (b) of sub-section 1] is a valuable safeguard in the trial process for the accused to establish his innocence;
b. section 313, which is intended to ensure a direct dialogue between the court and the accused, casts a mandatory duty on the court to question the accused generally on the case for the purpose of enabling him to personally explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him;
c. when questioned, the accused may not admit his involvement at all and choose to flatly deny or outrightly repudiate whatever is put to him by the court;
d. the accused may even admit or own incriminating circumstances adduced against him to adopt legally recognized defences;
e. an accused can make a statement without fear of being cross-examined by the prosecution or the latter having any right to cross-examine him;
f. the explanations that an accused may furnish cannot be considered in isolation but has to be considered in conjunction with the evidence adduced by the prosecution and therefore, no conviction can be premised solely on the basis of the section 313 statement(s);
g. statements of the accused in course of examination undersection 313, since not on oath, do not constitute evidence under section 3 of the Evidence Act, yet, the answers given are relevant for finding the truth and examining the veracity of the prosecution case;
h. statement(s) of the accused cannot be dissected to rely on the inculpatory part and ignore the exculpatory part and has/have to be read in the whole, inter alia, to test the authenticity of the exculpatory nature of admission; and
i. if the accused takes a defence and proffers any alternate version of events or interpretation, the court has to carefully analyze and consider his statements;
j. any failure to consider the accused’s explanation of incriminating circumstances, in a given case, may vitiate the trial and/or endanger the conviction. - Once a written statement is filed by the accused under subsection (5) of section 313, Cr. P.C. and the court marks it as an exhibit, such statement must be treated as part of the accused’s statement under sub-section (1) read with sub-section (4) thereof. In view of the latter sub-section, the written statement has to be considered in the light of the evidence led by the prosecution to appreciate the truthfulness or otherwise of such case and the contents of such statement weighed with the probabilities of the case either in favour of the accused or against him.
- Exception 4 to section 300, IPC ordains that culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offender having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner. The explanation thereto clarifies that it is immaterial in such cases which party offers the provocation or commits the first assault. Four requirements must be satisfied to invoke this exception, viz. (i) it was a sudden fight; (ii) there was no premeditation; (iii) the act was done in a heat of passion; and (iv) the assailant had not taken any undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.
Relevant Para No.
- 15 ,17, 24, 27