Priyan vs State Of Kerala on 17 September, 2020
In this context
it is relevant to quote Kalippilakkal Varghese and
Anr. v. State of Kerala [2020 3 KHC 76] wherein
while dealing with questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
and the prejudice which would be caused in omitting to put
questions to accused during examination,it has been held
by this Court that merely because a pointed and specific
question as to knowledge and intention was not formulated
and put to accused will not result in causing any prejudice to
the accused vitiating the conviction, since his opportunity to
explain incriminating circumstances cannot be said to be
impaired or taken away. In this case, as stated earlier,
though no specific question was put to the accused with
regard to the presence of human blood in his shirt and
dhothi which were marked as MOs 2 and 3, no prejudice as
such seems to have been caused since he has specifically
denied in this 313 additional statement about his connection
with those items. So also with regard to MO8 button also he
Crl.A.No.763/2016 51
has made a total denial whereas from the evidence
adduced from the side of prosecution the said shirt was
seized after his arrest finding that it was the shirt which was
worn by him at the time of incident. PW1 identified the same
during evidence also. So the contention of the learned
counsel regarding the failure of the Sessions Judge to put
questions specifically with regard to the material objects
during his examination will not cause any prejudice to the
accused since he has filed additional statement expressly
denying the connection with those items. So evidence
adduced from the side of the prosecution would prove
beyond any reasonable doubt the complicity of the accused
in the commission of offence of causing death of the
deceased Francis and inflicting serious injuries upon PW1.
So we do not find any reason whatsoever to interfere with
the findings so entered into by the court below.