This summary discusses the significance of correctly questioning the accused during criminal trials. It references various court decisions to emphasize the duty of the trial court to present each material circumstance to the accused and allow them an opportunity to explain. Failure to adhere to this requirement may result in a serious irregularity and potentially vitiate the trial. However, if the irregularity does not prejudice the accused or cause a failure of justice, it can be considered a curable defect.

Key Points:

  1. The trial court must present each material circumstance individually to the accused.
  2. The purpose of examining the accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) is to enable them to explain any incriminating evidence.
  3. If material circumstances are not put forth to the accused, they should be excluded from consideration.
  4. Failure to present material circumstances to the accused can be a serious irregularity that vitiates the trial if it prejudiced the accused.
  5. Appellate courts can question the accused on material circumstances not presented during the trial.
  6. In case of an irregularity, the trial can be remanded to the stage of recording a supplementary statement under Section 313 of the CrPC.
  7. The delay in raising an objection regarding the omission is one factor among several to consider when determining if prejudice has occurred.

Properly questioning the accused is essential in criminal proceedings. The court must present each material circumstance individually, allowing the accused an opportunity to explain. Failure to comply with this requirement can be a serious irregularity that may prejudice the accused and potentially vitiate the trial. However, if the omission does not cause a failure of justice, it can be considered a curable defect. The timing of raising objections regarding omissions is one aspect to consider when evaluating the impact of the irregularity.

Raj Kumar @ Suman …..Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) …..Respondent
decided by the Supreme Court on May 11, 23.

By aor.sanjivnarang@gmail.com

Sanjiv Narang Adv. is an Advocate on Record in the Supreme Court of India. His qualifications include an LLB from University of Delhi and a Masters degree in Personnel Management from Panjab University,Chandigarh.In his more than 3 decades of experience, he has practiced law at the District, High Court and Supreme Court levels.He also has more than a decade of experience in the field of Management. He is the author of two books namely Laws for Women in India and Innovation, Why What and How.