JUDGMENT :

R.V. More, J.

1. Heard learned counsels for the respective parties.

2. By the impugned judgment and order dated 29.03.2018, the learned District & Sessions Judge, West Khasi Hills District, Nongstoin convicted the accused/appellant for an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of one year.

3. The prosecution's story in brief is that on 14.11.2015 (P.W. 1) Shri. Phling Kharthangmaw son of (L) Smti. Story Kharthangmaw appeared at the police station and submitted a written FIR to the effect that his mother Smti. Story Kharthangmaw was murdered by her own brother Shri. Sambar Kharthangmaw, the present appellant on 14.11.2015 at about 7:00 PM.

4. On receiving the FIR, police registered a case vide Mairang P.S. Case No. 55 (11) 2015, arrested the appellant/accused and started the investigation. After completion of the investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet against the present appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.

5. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge against the accused for an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, to which the present appellant/accused pleaded guilty. The learned Sessions Judge despite that, proceeded to record the evidence of the prosecution's witnesses. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the appellant/accused examined as many as twelve witnesses including the eye witness (P.W. 9). The learned Sessions Judge examine the last prosecution witness, namely S.I. H. Thabah (P.W. 12) on 01.02.2018 and thereafter, made endorsement in order sheet that prosecution evidence is treated as closed. On very same day, the endorsement was also made in the order sheet that the accused person has pleaded guilty and therefore, statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. is not required. The order sheet further shows that no opportunity was given to the defence to examine the defence witnesses.

6. The learned Sessions Judge after analyzing the evidence on record led by the prosecution and after hearing the arguments of both sides came to the conclusion that the evidence of the prosecution's witnesses are trustworthy and reliable and charge of the accused/appellant is proved. As stated earlier, the appellant/accused was thereafter sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life.

7. Mr. S.D. Upadhaya, learned Legal Aid Counsel submitted that in the present case, neither the statement of the accused/appellant under Section 313 is recorded, nor opportunity was given to the defence to examine defence witnesses. In the circumstances, he submitted that the trial is vitiated and the benefit of which must go to the appellant/accused. He lastly submits that the appeal may be allowed by quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and order dated 29.03.2018.

8. Mr. N.D. Chullai, learned AAG fairly conceded that gross error is committed by the learned Sessions Judge in not recording the statement of the appellant/accused under Section 313 and not giving an opportunity to the appellant to examine the defence witnesses. Learned AAG relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in Nar Singh v. State of Haryana: (2015) 1 SCC 496 submitted that the matter may be remanded to the learned Sessions Judge for fresh trial from the stage of recording of the statement under Section 313.

9. Admittedly, the accused and the deceased are tribals and they fall in tribal areas. By virtue of the provisions of Section 1 of Cr.P.C. only the Chapters other than Chapter VIII, X and XI are not applicable to the tribal areas. Nevertheless, there is no dispute that the spirit of the Cr.P.C. is applicable. The procedure for the trial of Sessions case is outlined in Chapter XVIII of the Cr.P.C. According to the procedure provided in that Chapter after the case is opened as required under Section226, if, upon consideration of the record of the