Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal by the accused against the High Court's order which expunged their examination under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and allowed for the re-examination of a witness. The appellants were facing trial for murder under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court had examined 34 witnesses, including the investigating officer, and recorded the accused's statements under section 313. The public prosecutor's application for re-examination of the first appellant was rejected by the trial court, which also corrected typographical errors in the witness's statement but refused to make substantive changes based on an unsigned correction slip. The High Court found fault with the trial court's procedure and allowed the prosecution to re-examine the witness while expunging the examination of the accused. The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the case, found that the High Court had overstepped its bounds by interfering with the trial court's discretion. The court held that the trial judge had acted appropriately in correcting typographical errors and that the provisions of section 278 were substantially complied with. The court also noted that the prosecution had not sought to recall the witness for further examination before the trial court closed its evidence. The Supreme Court reversed the High Court's order, allowing the appeal and directing the trial court to proceed with the case expeditiously under the new judge. The parties were ordered to appear before the trial court for further proceedings.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Correction of Evidence - Procedure for Correction - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 278 - The trial judge corrected typographical errors but refused to alter substantive parts of evidence based on an unsigned correction slip. The court held that the judge acted within his discretion and the provisions of section 278 were substantially complied with. (Paras 741-742) B) Criminal Procedure - Examination of Accused - Rights of Accused - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 313 - The trial judge is not required to consult counsel regarding the nature of questions posed to the accused. The court found no justification for the High Court's order to expunge the examination under section 313 and allow re-examination of a witness after the prosecution had closed its evidence. (Paras 742-743) C) Criminal Procedure - Transfer of Case - Jurisdiction of Trial Court - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The question of transferring the case to another bench was rendered moot as the trial judge had retired. The court directed the new judge to expedite the trial. (Paras 742-743)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in expunging the examination under section 313 and allowing re-examination of a witness.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, reversed the High Court's order, and directed the trial court to proceed with the case expeditiously under the new judge. The parties were ordered to appear before the trial court for further proceedings.
Law Points
- Correction of evidence
- Examination of accused
- Procedure under CrPC
- Re-examination of witnesses
