Criminal Law

Section 313 CrPC Violation: Carbon Copy Accused Statements Lead to Case Remand

Supreme Court remands murder case back to trial court due to fatal procedural error - all three accused given identical carbon copy statements under Section 313 CrPC, violating fundamental fair trial rights. Court emphasizes each accused must be individually examined on material circumstances against them.

Case Reference: Chandan Pasi & Ors. vs The State of Bihar (Criminal Appeal No. 5137-5138 of 2025) Decided by: Supreme Court of India Date: December 1, 2025

❓ Question

CAN A TRIAL COURT USE IDENTICAL "CARBON COPY" QUESTIONS FOR MULTIPLE ACCUSED DURING THEIR SECTION 313 CRPC EXAMINATION, AND IF SO, DOES THIS VIOLATE THEIR RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL?

✅ Answer

NO, IDENTICAL "CARBON COPY" EXAMINATION VIOLATES FAIR TRIAL RIGHTS. The Supreme Court has ruled that giving all accused persons identical statements during their Section 313 CrPC examination constitutes a serious procedural violation that requires the case to be sent back (remanded) for fresh examination. Each accused must be individually examined on material circumstances specific to their alleged involvement.

⚖️ Understanding Section 313 CrPC - Your Legal Rights

🔹 Purpose of Section 313 CrPC

  • Establishes direct dialogue between court and accused
  • Puts all incriminating evidence to the accused
  • Provides opportunity to explain circumstances
  • Based on natural justice principle: audi alteram partem
  • Not mere formality but substantive right

🔹 Court's Mandatory Duty

  • Must put each material circumstance separately
  • Questions must be specific and distinct
  • Must cover all evidence against accused
  • Examination must be after prosecution evidence concludes
  • Must ensure accused understands questions

🔹 Accused's Rights Under Section 313

  • Right to explain each circumstance
  • Right to offer alternative version of events
  • Right to remain silent
  • Statements not on oath - cannot cross-examine
  • Cannot be sole basis for conviction

🔹 Consequences of Violation

  • Trial vitiated if prejudice caused
  • Case can be remanded for fresh examination
  • Material circumstances not put are excluded
  • Conviction cannot stand on faulty examination
  • Appellate court can cure defect in certain cases

📜 Case Timeline & What Went Wrong

March 31, 2016

Incident: Ghughali Pasi allegedly assaulted and killed while returning from fields with family members

2016-2017

Trial Proceedings: Sessions Trial No. 256 of 2016 conducted before District & Sessions Judge, Buxar

March 27, 2017

Conviction: Trial Court convicts six persons under Section 302/34 IPC, sentences to life imprisonment

March 29, 2017

Sentencing: Formal sentencing order passed with fines and concurrent sentences

2017-2024

Appeal Process: Accused file appeal before Patna High Court challenging conviction

September 4 & 26, 2024

High Court Decision: Patna High Court affirms conviction in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 443 of 2017

December 1, 2025

Supreme Court Justice: SC allows appeal, remands case due to Section 313 CrPC violation

🚨 What Specifically Went Wrong in This Case

❌ Carbon Copy Statements

  • All three accused given identical statements
  • Same questions word-for-word for each person
  • No individualization of examination
  • Generic questions instead of specific circumstances

❌ Generic, Vague Questions

  • Only two questions directly related to incident
  • Second question: Bare allegations with omnibus denial
  • Third question: "alleged and evidenced" without specifics
  • No material circumstances put individually

❌ Prosecution Failure

  • Prosecutor failed to assist court in proper examination
  • Duty to ensure fair examination disregarded
  • Focused on conviction rather than fair process
  • Violated role as officer of the court

❌ Judicial Negligence

  • Trial Judge failed to ensure proper compliance
  • Accepted identical statements without scrutiny
  • Violated mandatory duty under Section 313
  • Compromised fundamental fair trial rights

🧭 Your Action Plan: Protecting Your Section 313 Rights

📝 If You Are Facing Criminal Trial

✅ Step 1: Understand Section 313 Examination

  • Know this is YOUR opportunity to explain evidence
  • Understand questions before answering
  • You can consult lawyer before examination
  • You have right to remain silent or give explanation
  • Statements can support your defense version

✅ Step 2: Ensure Proper Examination

  • Demand specific questions about material evidence
  • Object if questions are generic or vague
  • Ensure all incriminating evidence is put to you
  • Request clarification if questions unclear
  • Note any procedural violations

⚖️ Key Legal Rights to Assert During Section 313 Examination

Legal Right Basis in Law How to Assert It
Individual Examination Section 313(1)(b) CrPC Demand questions specific to your alleged role
Material Circumstances Sanatan Naskar vs State of W.B. Ensure each piece of evidence against you is put separately
Understanding Questions Natural Justice Principles Request translation/clarification if needed
Right to Explanation Indrakunwar vs State of Chhattisgarh Provide detailed explanation for each circumstance

⚖️ If Section 313 Examination is Defective

✅ Raise Objection Immediately or in Appeal

  • Object during trial if examination defective
  • If convicted, raise as ground in appeal
  • Cite Chandan Pasi judgment as precedent
  • Show prejudice caused by defective examination
  • Request remand for fresh examination

📘 Key Legal Terms Explained

Section 313 CrPC

Power to examine the accused - allows court to question accused about evidence after prosecution case ends.

Remand

Sending case back to lower court for fresh proceedings on specific issues while keeping other findings intact.

Material Circumstances

Important facts and evidence that form basis for prosecution case and potential conviction.

Audi Alteram Partem

Latin for "hear the other side" - fundamental principle of natural justice requiring both parties be heard.

Vitiation of Trial

Making trial invalid due to serious procedural irregularities that prejudice accused's rights.

💡 Core Takeaway from the Supreme Court

"The statements extracted above reveal a sorry state of affairs - an abject failure on the part of the Court in complying with the basic tenets of law. The statements given by all three persons are carbon copies of each other. How such statements can pass muster at the hands of the learned Trial Judge is something which we fail to understand."

This judgment reinforces that procedural safeguards are not mere technicalities but fundamental rights that protect the accused from wrongful conviction. The Supreme Court emphasized that Section 313 CrPC examination must be meaningful, individualized, and comprehensive. When courts reduce this critical procedural safeguard to a mechanical exercise using "carbon copy" statements, they violate the very essence of fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

⚖️ Supreme Court's Remedy

The Court remanded the case to the Trial Court specifically for fresh recording of Section 313 CrPC statements for the three appellants. The remand is limited to this issue only, and the Trial Court must complete this process within four months from receiving the Supreme Court's order. Importantly, the Court clarified that this remand does not affect the findings against other accused persons who didn't appeal.

📞 When to Seek Professional Legal Help

👨‍⚖️ Criminal Lawyer Essential For

  • Serious criminal charges like murder, rape, etc.
  • Complex trials with multiple accused
  • Section 313 examination preparation and strategy
  • Appeals based on procedural violations
  • Cases involving constitutional rights arguments

📝 You Should Know & Monitor

  • Basic understanding of Section 313 rights
  • Monitoring if examination is proper and individualized
  • Documenting procedural violations during trial
  • Understanding when to object to defective examination
  • Knowing fundamental fair trial principles

⚠️ DISCLAIMER

This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified legal professional for specific legal guidance. The information provided is based on judicial interpretation and may be subject to changes in law.

🌿 LegalEcoSys Mission

Making Supreme Court judgments accessible and actionable for every Indian citizen navigating legal challenges.

This analysis decodes a critical criminal procedure judgment to help citizens understand their right to proper examination under Section 313 CrPC. It empowers accused persons to recognize and challenge procedural violations that could compromise their fair trial rights, ensuring that justice is not only done but seen to be done through proper procedures.