Section 313 CrPC , the fundamental principle of fairness

Section 313 of the code of criminal procedure, a fundamental principle of fairness. In the criminal trial after registration of the FIR, police investigates the crime. After that, submits its report, i.e. charge-sheet. Charge sheet shows those evidence and circumstances which incriminate the accused. Court frames charges by that charge sheet and incriminating material collected […]

Section 313 of the code of criminal procedure, a fundamental principle of fairness. In the criminal trial after registration of the FIR, police investigates the crime. After that, submits its report, i.e. charge-sheet. Charge sheet shows those evidence and circumstances which incriminate the accused. Court frames charges by that charge sheet and incriminating material collected by police during the investigation. After the recording of prosecution evidence, section 313 crpc provides an opportunity to the accused to apprised the incriminatory proof against him and get his explanation about such incriminatory evidence. Section 313 Cr.P.C. prescribes a procedural safeguard for an accused by giving him an opportunity to explain the facts and circumstances appearing against him in the evidence. It imposes a duty on the Court to question the appropriately accused and reasonably to bring home to him the exact case.The court shall not administer an oath or warn the accused before examination under section 313. Such an opportunity being given to the accused is part of a fair trial.Importance of this sectionIf trial court did not seek the explanation of accused in respect of any incriminating evidence, then that (evidence) cannot be considered against the accused [Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, (1984) 4 SCC 116]. The court is bound to take explanation from accused regarding the incriminating circumstances proved against him.In Naval Kishore Singh v. State of Bihar, (2004) 7 SCC 502 the Supreme Court has opined that examination, under section 313, shall not be carried out as an empty formality. It is only after the entire prosecution evidence is unfurled the accused would be in a position to articulate his defence and to give an explanation to the circumstances appearing in the evidence against him.In Kuldip Singh & Ors. V State of Delhi (2003) 12 SCC 528, Supreme Court held that when exigent incriminating circumstance was not put to the accused during his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the prosecution cannot use that piece of evidence against the accused.In Ashok Debbarma @ Achak Debbarma vs State of Tripura the Supreme Court has held that the statement of the accused under Section 313 CrPC for the admission of his guilt or confession as such cannot be made the sole basis for finding the accused guilty.
Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

क्या चेक बाउंस का केस मियाद समाप्त होने के बाद भी दाखिल हो सकता है

Negotiable Instruments Act के अंतर्गत, वैधानिक अवधि समाप्त होने के बाद भी चेक बाउंस का मामला दायर किया जा सकता है। यदि शिकायतकर्ता देरी का उचित कारण प्रस्तुत करता है, तो न्यायालय विलंब को क्षमा कर शिकायत स्वीकार कर सकता है। नोटिस के बाद निर्धारित समय में भुगतान न होने पर कार्यवाही प्रारंभ की जा सकती है।

Cancellation of bail when accused tempering with witness

Seeking the cancellation of bail is possible when an accused person tampers with witnesses or influences a trial. This guide explains legal grounds for such actions, focusing on mandatory procedures under Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act and post-bail threats. Learn how victims can approach higher courts to ensure a fair trial and protect their rights.

Evidence of interested witness is admissible in criminal proceedings

In criminal law, the testimony of a related witness cannot be discarded solely due to their relationship with the victim. This legal overview clarifies the distinction between related and interested witnesses, citing key Supreme Court rulings. It explains how natural witnesses provide admissible evidence that reliably forms the basis for a conviction, even without independent corroboration.

SDM cannot attach property under section 146 crpc when civil suit is pending

A Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot legally attach property under Section 146 of the CrPC if a civil suit regarding the same property is already pending. This guide explains why such orders lack jurisdiction and outlines the proper legal remedy, including filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC to the High Court based on established Supreme Court precedents.

Produce Pendrive as Evidence: Legal Process Explained

Legal experts clarify that digital evidence, such as a pen drive, can be produced even at an advanced stage of a criminal trial under Section 294 of the CrPC. If a trial court rejects such material evidence based on timing, the defendant may challenge the order in the High Court to ensure a fair trial and just adjudication.