SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(All) 292

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
B. K. RATHI
PINTU - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. - Respondents
CRI. MISC. APPLN. 1189 Of 2002
Decided On : 02/18/2002

Advocates Appeared:
R.P.Singh Yadav

The question regarding the accused's intention to adduce evidence in defence should not be put to them while recording their statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C.

Headnote:

Section 313 Cr. P. C. - Recording of Accused's Statement - Procedure for Adducing Evidence in Defence

Fact of the Case:

The accused's statements were recorded under Section 313 Cr. P. C. and they initially stated that they did not want to adduce evidence in defence. They later requested to adduce evidence, which was rejected by the trial court.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the question regarding the accused's intention to adduce evidence in defence should not have been put to them while recording their statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C. The court directed the trial court to pass an order under Section 232 Cr. P. C. and then call upon the accused to enter on their defence and adduce evidence in defence under Section 233 Cr. P. C.

Issues: Recording of accused's statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C., procedure for adducing evidence in defence

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the provisions of Chapter XVIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, especially Section 232 and 233 Cr. P. C., and concluded that the question regarding the accused's intention to adduce evidence in defence should not be put to them while recording their statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C.

Final Decision: The court directed the trial court to follow the correct procedure for adducing evidence in defence and allowed the accused to produce evidence in defence, despite their initial statement that they did not want to do so.

B. K. RATHI, J.

( 1 ) THE applicants are accused in S. T. No. 1302 of 1999 State v. Pintu and another, under Section 376 I. P. C. pending in the Court of XI Addl. Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr. In the case, the statements of the applicants were recorded under Section 313 Cr. P. C. on 25-7-2001. One of the questions, which was question No. 10, put to the applicants was whether they want to adduce evidence in defence. The reply given to this question by the applicants was in negative.

( 2 ) THEREAFTER, the applicants moved an application that the statements under Section 313 Cr. P. C. were recorded in the absence of the their counsel; that the reply to question No. 10 in negative has been recorded by mistake; that they want to adduce oral as well as documentary evidence in defence. The request has been rejected by the impugned order, dated 8-01-2002 by the trial Court. Aggrieved by it, this petition has been preferred.

( 3 ) I have heard Sri R. P. S. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A. G. A.

( 4 ) THE argument that wrong reply to the question No. 10 was recorded by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge cannot be accepted. However, for this reason the applicants cannot be debarred from producing oral or documentary evidence in defence.

( 5 ) THE procedure for trial before a Court of Session has been provided in Chapter XVIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 consisting of Sections 225 to 237 Cr. P. C. Sections 231 and 233 of the Code provide that Sessions Judge after recording the entire evidence of the prosecution and examining the accused and hearing the prosecution and the defence may record the order of acquittal if he considers that there is no evidence that the accused has committed the offence. Section 233 further provides that if no order of acquittal is recorded under Section 232 Cr. P. C. , the accused shall be called upon to enter on his defence and to adduce any evidence he may have in support thereof. For the purpose of clarity Sections 232 and 233 (1) Cr. P. C. are reproduced below:"section 232: Acquittal - If, after taking the evidence for the prosecution, examining the accused and hearing the prosecution and the defence on the point, the Judge considers that there is no evidence that the accused committed the offence, the Judge shall record an order of acquittal. Section 233 (1) : Entering upon defence :- Where the accused is not acquitted under Section 232, he shall be called upon to enter on his defence and adduce any evidence he may have in support thereof. "

( 6 ) FROM the perusal of the provisions of Chapter XVIII the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, especially Section 232 and 233 Cr. P. C. , it is apparent that the question whether the accused want to produce evidence in defence should not be put to the accused while recording statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C. Therefore, question No. 10 was wrongly put to the petitioners while examining them under Section 313 Cr. P. C.

( 7 ) IN view of the above provisions, the question- Whether the accused want to adduce evidence in defence should not have been put to the accused while recording statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C. in Sessions trial. After the prosecution evidence is recorded and the statement of the accused is also recorded, an order should be passed under Sections 232 Cr. P. C. If the accused are not acquitted by that order on the ground that there is no evidence that the accused committed the offence, only then the accused should be called upon to enter into his defence and adduce any evidence he may have in support thereof as provided under in Section 233 Cr. P. C.

( 8 ) IN view of what has been said above, the fact that the accused have stated in reply to question No. 10 that they do not want to adduce any evidence in defence is of no avail. They cannot be debarred from adducing evidence in defence on that score. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, therefore, shall pass an order under Section 232 Cr. P. C. and, thereafte




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top