AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N. Ananda, J.—Heard learned Government Advocate for the State. There are concurrent findings of the courts below that petitioners have committed offences punishable under Sections 324, 325, 504 r/w 34 IPC.
After going through the records and judgment of the trial court, I find that, on behalf of the prosecution, PW''s. 1 to 8 were examined. The learned counsel for accused, for the reasons not apparent on the record had not cross-examined these witnesses. In the circumstances, the learned trial judge should have provided legal assistance to the accused.
Apart from this, when the accused were examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate has framed four questions. The first question is numbered as question No. 2; the second question is framed by combining evidence of PW''s. 1 to 6 and the joint statements of accused No. 1 to 3 are recorded. The entire evidence of P.W. 7 is put in the form of question No. 3 and entire evidence of PW 8 is put in the form of question No. 4.
The law is fairly well settled, examination of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C., is not an empty formality. The purpose of examination of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C., is to question the accused about incriminating evidence available against him so that accused may offer his explanation, if any, to the incriminating evidence available against him. These glaring errors committed by the learned trial judge have not been noticed by the learned judge of the I-appellate court. Therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
The Revision Petition is accepted. The judgment made by the learned Magistrate in C.C. No. 13349/2008 and judgment made by the I-appellate court in Crl. A 410/2010 are set aside. The matter is remanded to the learned Magistrate for reconsideration after providing an opportunity to the accused to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses and thereafter, record the statement of accused as provided u/s 313 Cr.P.C., and decide the case on merits after hearing the learned counsel for petitioner and Additional Public Prosecutor.
Office is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment.