S. 313 CrPC | Trial Court Is Required To Bring 'Specific Attention' Of Accused To Incriminating Materials: Meghalaya High Court

The Meghalaya High Court has set aside the conviction and the ensuing punishment of a murder accused due to failure of the Trial Court to discharge its duties properly as provided under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.'). The Court was of the opinion that Trial Courts are required to attract 'specific attention' of accused to those materials which are likely to be considered while recording conviction. While passing an order for re-trial from the stage of Section 313, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W. Diengdoh observed, "In the present case, the records do not reveal that the exercise was appropriately conducted by the trial court. The recording of the statement of the appellant under Section 313 of the Code is without any questions being put to the appellant and without the material evidence that would weigh against the appellant being specifically pointed out to the appellant." Brief Facts: This criminal appeal was filed against a judgment of conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 dated October 4, 2017 and the order of punishment of December 11, 2017. The appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for life. The trial was conducted by the District Council Court in Tura. Contentions: The State fairly submitted that the perfunctory manner in which the matter was conducted by the Trial Court at the stage of Section 313, Cr.P.C., the Appellate Court may need to look into such aspect of the matter. The appellant also submitted that a fair opportunity was not afforded to him to deal with the evidence, which were apparently against him. Court's Observations: The Court observed that Section 313 of the Code conceives of an opportunity being extended to accused in every trial for the purpose of enabling him to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him. Though no oath can be administered to the accused in course of his examination by the Trial Court under Section 313, his replies to the specific questions may be taken into consideration by the Court while considering whether he had committed the offence and the circumstances pertaining to the same. The Court then proceeded on to elaborate the duties of Trial Courts under Section 313 and thus noted, "An omnibus offer by the trial court for the appellant to say whatever he pleases would not suffice for the exercise that the trial court is required to perform. It is the duty of the trial court to bring to the specific attention of the appellant the material that may be considered relevant in finding the appellant guilty. Thus, eyewitness accounts, if any, need to be summarised, without the key details therein being skipped, for the appellant to be made aware of the grounds that may lead to his conviction. It would not do for the trial court to inform the appellant that the evidence had been adduced in full and call upon the appellant to offer his comments on the evidence." In this connection, the Bench acknowledged a judgment of the Apex Court, referred by the State, in Nar Singh v. State of Haryana, as to the duties and obligations of both the Trial Courts and the Appellate Courts under Section 313 of the Code and when the same are not appropriately conducted. The High Court was of the opinion that the Trial Court, in the instant case, failed to abide by the same. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction was set aside along with the order of punishment. The matter was remanded back to the Trial Court for fresh conduct of the trial from the stage under Section 313, for the necessary exercise under such provision being appropriately done. Since the appellant had already undergone detention for over ten years, the Court expressed hope that the trial will be concluded within a month. Case Title: Tengsal D. Sangma v. State of Meghalaya & Ors. Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. 2 of 2021 Judgment Dated: 20th June 2022 Coram: Sanjib Banerjee, CJ. & W. Diengdoh, J. Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. H.R. Nath, Advocate with Ms. B. Sun and Mr. J.H. Mawphniang, Advocates Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. K. Khan, Senior Government Advocate with Mr. S. Sengupta, Addl. Senior Government Advocate Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Meg) 21 Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

S. 313 CrPC | Trial Court Is Required To Bring 'Specific Attention' Of Accused To Incriminating Materials: Meghalaya High Court

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

Tags