Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.19 seconds)
Kishori Yadav & Ors vs State Of Bihar on 14 October, 2017 cites

Asraf Ali vs State Of Assam on 17 July, 2008

"73. It is a settled law that the statement under Section 313 Cr. PC is to serve a dual purpose, firstly, to afford to the accused an opportunity to explain his conduct and secondly to use denials of established facts as incriminating evidence against him. In this regard, we may refer to some recent judgments of this Court. This Court in Asraf Ali v. State of Assam [(2008) 16 SCC 328] has observed as follows :
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 144 - A Pasayat - Full Document

S. Harnam Singh vs The State (Delhi Admn.) on 23 March, 1976

22. The object of Section 313 of the Code is to establish a direct dialogue between the court and the accused. If a point in the evidence is important against the accused, and the conviction is intended to be based upon it, it is right and proper that the accused should be questioned about the matter and be given an opportunity of explaining it. Where no specific question has been put by the trial court on an inculpatory material in the prosecution evidence, it would vitiate the trial. Of course, all these are subject to rider whether they have caused miscarriage of justice or prejudice. This Court also expressed a similar view in S. Harnam Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) while dealing with Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (corresponding to Section 313 of the Code). Non-indication of inculpatory material in its relevant facts by the trial court to the accused adds to the vulnerability of the prosecution case. Recording of a statement of the accused under Section 313 is not a purposeless exercise."
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 112 - R S Sarkaria - Full Document

Munna Kumar Upadhyaya @ M.Upadhyaya vs State Of A.P.Tr.Pub.Prosecutor on 8 May, 2012

In the instant case the kind of question posed to the appellant does not satisfy the requirement of Section 313 Cr.P.C. Reference in this connection may be made to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Munna Kumar Upadhyaya @ Munna Upadhyaya vs State of Andhra.Pradesh Through Public Prosecutor, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh: (2012) 6 SCC 174:
Supreme Court of India Cites 50 - Cited by 111 - S Kumar - Full Document
1