CAUSE TITLE:
Premchand v. The State of Maharashtra
DATE OF ORDER:
3 March 2023
JUDGE(S):
Hon’ble Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Hon’ble Justice Dipankar Datta
PARTIES:
Appellant: Premchand
Respondent: The State of Maharashtra
SUBJECT:
The Hon’ble Supreme Court (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Court’), held that once the accused files a written statement u/s 313(5) of Cr.P.C and the same is marker as exhibit by the Trial Court marks, then such statement will be treated as part of the statement of the accused u/s 313(1) r/w Section 313(4) Cr.P.C.
The Ld. Court allowed the appeal in the present case and quashed the impugned order and judgement of the Bombay High Court.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS:
Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Section 302 - Punishment for murder - Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
- Section 304 - Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Whoever commits culpable homicide not amounting to murder shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine, or with both, if the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death, or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.
- Section 307 - Attempt to murder - Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
- Section 313 - Power to examine the accused -
- In every inquiry or trial, for the purpose of enabling the accused personally to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him, the Court-
- may at any stage, without previously warning the accused, put such questions to him as the Court considers necessary;
- shall, after the witnesses for the prosecution have been examined and before he is called on for his defence, question him generally on the case: Provided that in a summons- case, where the Court has dispensed with the personal attendance of the accused, it may also dispense with his examination under clause (b).
- No oath shall be administered to the accused when he is examined under sub- section (1).
- The accused shall not render himself liable to punishment by refusing to answer such questions, or by giving false answers to them.
- The answers given by the accused may be taken into consideration in such inquiry or trial, and put in evidence for or against him in any other inquiry into, or trial for, any other offence which such answers may tend to show he has committed.
Indian Evidence Act, 1872
- Section 27 - How much of information received from accused may be proved - Provided that, when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved.
BRIEF FACTS:
- On 26th September, 2013, Nandkishor Korde, the victim was murdered by the appellant. There were three other victims who received knife injuries by the appellant but they managed to survive.
- Subsequently, the mother of the deceased lodged an FIR against the appellant for the murder of her son under Section 302 and 307 IPC. After due investigation, a charge sheet was created and the appellant accused was arrested.
- The Ld. Trial Court sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment for the offence of murder of the deceased and an attempt to murder of the other three victims. An appeal was filed against the impugned order and judgement of the Trial Court in the Bombay High Court, wherein the appeal was dismissed.
- Accordingly, aggrieved by the order of the High Court, the appellant filed for an appeal in the Supreme Court.
QUESTIONS RAISED:
- Whether the judgement of the High Court and the Trial Court needs to be quashed?
- Whether the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to the appellant was justified?
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE APPELLANT:
- The Counsel for the appellant contended that none of the other persons present at the site of occurrence were examined as prosecution witnesses. Had they been examined in the Court, they would not have supported the prosecution’s case. Hence, non-examination of such independent witnesses weakens the prosecution's case.
- It was also contended by the appellant that the age of the appellant at the time of the incident was 58 years. It is quite improbable to imagine a man in his late 50s to freely inflict knife injuries on four people without any of them making an attempt to resist him from doing so.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENTS:
- The Counsel for the Respondent supported the conviction and order of sentence pronounced by the Sessions Judge. It was contended that the evidence of the present case has already been appreciated and the judgement of the High Court is in concurrence with that of the Session Judge. Hence, no point lies in hearing the appeal and wasting the Court’s valuable time.
ANALYSIS BY THE COURT:
- The Ld. Court observed that as per the written statement filed by the appellant before the Trial Court in his defence u/s 313 Cr.P.C., he used to visit Katol every 2 to 3 months to collect rent. On one of such visits to Katol he was threatened by the deceased and was attacked by the other three prosecution witnesses. Thereafter, he went to the nearest police station to lodge an FIR but to no avail.
- The Court then made the following observations -
- Section 313(b)(1) of Cr.P.C. is an important safeguard for an accused to establish his innocence in the trial process;
- The Courts must ensure to question the accused on the case so that they can personally explain all the circumstances that led to the happening or non-happening of the event;
- The accused is not bound to admit his involvement in the case;
- The accused can accept the incriminating evidence produced against him and later adopt legally recognized defences.
CONCLUSION
It was held by the Ld. Court that the use of Section 313 of Cr.P.C should be just and to approach the ends of justice. It was also held by the Court that once the accused files a written statement u/s 313(5) of Cr.P.C and the same is marker as exhibit by the Trial Court marks, then such statement will be treated as part of the statement of the accused u/s 313(1) r/w Section 313(4) Cr.P.C.
