Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Hon’ble Justice Navin Sinha and Hon'ble Justice BR Gavai on 04/10/2019 (Thursday) passed a Judgement in the case of Fainul Khan & Others V. State of Jharkhand & another that “The right of the Victim and the society at large for correction of deviant behaviour cannot be made subservient to the right of an accused by placing the latter at a pedestal higher than necessary for a fair trial.”
The bench was addressing the contention raised on behalf of the accused that proper opportunity to defend was denied under section 313 of CrPC as the incriminating question put to them ware extremely casual and perfunctory in barely two pages. It was contended that all relevant question about the accusations were not put to the accused. It is noted that section 313 of CrPC incorporates the principle of audi alteram partem and provides an opportunity to the accused of his defence by making him aware fully of the prosecution allegations against him and to answer the same in support of his innocence. The bench reiterated that the challenge to the conviction based on non-compliance of section 313 CrPC cannot be entertained unless the accused demonstrate that the prejudice has been caused to them. It further observed:
“But equally there cannot be a generalized presumption of prejudice to an accused merely because of any omission or inadequate questions put to an accused thereunder. Ultimately it will be a question to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case including the nature of other evidence available, the kind of questions put to an accused, considered with anything further that the accused may state in his defence.
In other words, there will have to be a cumulative balancing of several factors. While the rights of an accused to a fair trial are undoubtedly important, the rights of the victim and the society at large for correction of deviant behaviour cannot be made subservient to the rights of an accused by placing the latter at a pedestal higher than necessary for a fair trial.”
Bench concluded that there is no irregularity in a procedure under Section 313 of CrPC, much less any prejudice caused to the accused and therefore dismissed their appeals.
86540
103860
630
114
59824