Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 · Chapter XXIV: General Provisions As to Inquiries and Trials
Section 313: Power to examine the accused
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
(1) 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—
(a) may at any stage, without previously warning the accused put such questions to him as the Court considers necessary;
(b) 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).
(2) No oath shall be administered to the accused when he is examined under sub-section (1). 1. Ins. by Act 5 of 2009, s. 21 (w.e.f. 1-11-2010). 2. Ins. by Act 25 of 2005, s. 27 (w.e.f. 23-6-2006).
(3) The accused shall not render himself liable to punishment by refusing to answer such questions, or by giving false answers to them.
(4) 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. [(5) The Court may take help of Prosecutor and Defence Counsel in preparing relevant questions which are to be put to the accused and the Court may permit filing of written statement by the accused as sufficient compliance of this section.]
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 313
-
Jothi @ Nagajothi v. The State, Rep. By the Inspector of Police
This is an appeal challenging the judgment dated 27.06.2024 passed by the High Court, whereby the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant u/ss.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) and 8(c) r/w 29(1) of the Narcotic Drugs…
-
Surender Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant could be convicted for an offence lesser than one punishable u/s.302, Penal Code, 1860.
-
Govind Mandavi v. State of Chattisgarh
Whether the trial Court as well as the High Court committed grave errors in facts as well as in law while appreciating the evidence available on record and convicting the accused-appellant for the offences alleged…
-
Raj Kumar @ Bheema v. State of NCT of Delhi
Appellant-accused was convicted for the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC. The High Court further affirmed the order on sentence dated 20.02.2021, whereby the accused-appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for…
-
Mahaveer v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.
Issue arose whether the acquittal of the appellant-director of the company was correctly reversed by the High Court and whether his conviction u/ss.39 and 44 of the Electricity Act, 1910 for committing theft of energy…
-
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
Trial Court found appellant guilty for the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act. An appeal against the said conviction was dismissed by the…
-
Nilesh Baburao Gitte v. State of Maharashtra
Appellant was convicted for matricide-killing of one’s own mother. By the present appeal, the appellant calls in question the correctness of the judgment of the High Court.
-
Zainul v. The State of Bihar
The High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellants herein and thereby affirmed the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court in Sessions Case No. 124 of 1989 holding the appellants herein…
-
Kailas S/o Bajirao Pawar v. The State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in ordering a re-trial; if not, then what would be the appropriate order that may be passed in this appeal.
-
Akhtar Ali @ Ali Akhtar @ Shamim @ Raja Ustad v. State of Uttarakhand
Whether the conviction of the appellants, as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court, deserves to be upheld or whether they are entitled to acquittal.
-
Geeta v. The State of Karnataka
Whether the conviction of the appellant u/s.306, IPC is sustainable; was the evidence against the appellant of such nature that the overt acts attributed to her left the deceased-victim with no option except to commit…
-
Sushil Kumar Tiwari v. Hare Ram Sah & Ors.
Allegation against the respondent nos.1 and 2 that they raped a minor girl. It is admitted that they never committed the acts together and always acted separately. In light of the controversy involved in the instant…
-
Tarun Sharma v. State of Haryana.
Conviction of the appellant u/s.302, IPC based on the statement/ dying declaration (Exh. P-34) of the deceased, if ought to be set aside.
-
Manoj Tejraj Jain v. State of Gujarat
Challenge to the judgment of the High Court whereby the appeals filed by the appellants herein were dismissed against the judgment of the trial court convicting them for offences u/ss.25A and 29, Narcotic Drugs and…
-
Putai v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The accused-appellants were convicted for the offences punishable u/ss.376(2)(g), 201 and 302 of Penal Code, 1860. The High Court dismissed the appeals against conviction preferred by the accused-appellants.
-
Neelam Kumari v. The State of Himachal Pradesh
Whether the conviction and sentence of the appellant u/s.302, IPC for the murder of her infant son ought to be set aside.
-
K. Prabhakar Hegde v. Bank of Baroda
(i) Whether denial of the report of preliminary inquiry prepared by the officer entrusted by Vijaya Bank (which merged with the respondent in the year 2019) to conduct such inquiry, who happened to be the sole…
-
Irfan v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Whether the High Court erred in granting bail to the Respondent No.2 holding that any further detention would be detrimental to his defence in the trial and inconsistent with the norms of fairness in criminal…
-
Mini v. CBI/SPE Cochin
This appeal is by widow of the deceased convict against the judgment and order of the High Court whereby conviction of her husband, u/ss.7, 13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, has been upheld.
-
Shail Kumari v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the conviction, as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court was totally based on conjectures and surmises; whether the conviction of the appellant u/s.302 IPC is sustainable in law.
-
Narayan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the High Court erred in passing the impugned judgment relying on the confessional FIR filed by the appellant-accused himself and the medical evidence to uphold his conviction, however, altering it from s.302,…
-
Kattavellai @ Devakar v. State of Tamilnadu
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for offence punishable u/ss.302, 376 and 397 IPC.
-
Kum. Shubha @ Shubhashankar v. State of Karnataka & Anr.
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the conviction of the appellants by the High Court u/s.302 read with s.120-B, IPC and additionally, s.201, IPC for A-4 alone, is justified.
-
Rahil & Anr. v. State (Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi)
Whether the High Court erred in reversing the acquittal passed by the trial court and convicting the appellants for offence u/s.302, Penal Code, 1860 and sentencing them to life imprisonment.
-
Chetan v. The State of Karnataka
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant u/ss.302, 304 IPC, and u/ss.3, 5 of the Arms Act, 1959.
-
Padman Bibhar v. State of Odisha
Whether appellant can be convicted only on the basis of evidence on ‘last seen together’.
-
Ramji Prasad Jaiswal @ Ramjee Prasad Jaiswal and Ors. v. State of Bihar
Whether in the facts of the case there was a breach of s.313, CrPC causing prejudice to the appellants and vitiating the trial against them.
-
Hakim v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.
These instant two appeals assail concurrent findings of conviction u/s.326A of the Penal Code, 1860 and sentence thereof against accused no.1 and accused no.2 respectively appellants herein.
-
Virender Pal @ Vipin v. State of Haryana
Issue arose as regards correctness of High Court order dismissing the appeal of the accused-appellant and upholding his conviction u/s.304-B of Penal Code, 1860.
-
Chunni Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the accused at the time of commission of crime was incapable of making conscious and informed decision or was suffering from certain mental incapacity or unsoundness of mind; Whether a benefit of doubt may be…
-
Dashrath v. The State of Maharashtra
The conviction of the appellant as well as the sentence imposed on him u/ss.7 and 13(1)(d) r/w. s.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is questioned.
-
Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court by which the accused was acquitted of the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC.
-
Subhash Aggarwal v. The State of NCT of Delhi
Filicide or suicide is the vexing question in the instant case where a father was tried and convicted u/s.302 of the Penal Code, 1860 r/w. s.25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
-
N. Eswaranathan v. State Represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police
Misconduct committed by Advocates. The Advocates offered an absolute and unconditional apology. Whether the advocates are worthy of pardon.
-
Pinki v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.
Whether the High Court erred in passing various orders granting bail to accused persons in matters involving offences of serious nature of child trafficking.
-
Jaspal Singh Kaural v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Appellant established physical relationship with the complainant on promise of marriage. Complainant obtained divorce from her husband on the assurance of the appellant that he will marry her. Later, on refusal of the…
-
Gyanendra Singh @ Raja Singh v. State of U.P.
Whether the conviction of the appellant ought to have been recorded under the IPC or whether the provisions of the Special law, i.e., Section 42A of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, would prevail…
-
Patel Babubhai Manohardas & Ors. v. State of Gujarat
The four appellants were convicted by the Trial Court u/ss.306 and 114 of Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years. The High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. Whether the High Court…
-
Abdul Wahid & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan
Whether it is for the prosecution to connect the accused to the alleged crime by producing credible and legally admissible evidence to punish.
-
The State of Chattisgarh v. Ashok Bhoi Etc.
Whether the High Court was justified in allowing the criminal appeal preferred by accused-respondent and dismissing acquittal appeal preferred by the State, thereby acquitting both the accused persons.
-
Hiralal Babulal Soni v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Issue arose as regards the sustainability of the conviction of the accused u/s.120B and 411 IPC, when the seized gold bars are not the same gold bars linked to the fraudulent transactions.
-
Md. Bani Alam Mazid @ Dhan v. State of Assam
In a case where the appellant alongwith a co-accused was alleged to have kidnapped and murdered the minor daughter of PW1, the issues for consideration were: (i) Whether the chain of circumstantial evidence based on…
-
The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Balveer Singh
Does the Evidence Act, 1872 prescribe any particular age as a determinative factor to treat a witness to be a competent witness; Does the Evidence Act treat evidence of a child on the same footing as any other witness;…
-
Surinder Dogra v. State Through Director CBI
Whether the concurrent conviction of the appellant under Sections 420, 468 and 471, Ranbir Penal Code, 1989 and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5 (2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was justified.
-
The State of Himachal Pradesh v. Rajesh Kumar @ Munnu
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court acquitting the accused u/ss.376 and 452 IPC.
-
Tapas Kumar Palit v. State of Chhattisgarh
Appellant in judicial custody for 5 years, no certainty as regards the time likely to take in conclusion of the trial. Whether the appellant is entitled to bail.
-
Ramesh A. Naika v. The Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka Etc.
Appellant-R, a bank manager, was convicted of murdering his two minor children, along with his sister-in-law and mother-in-law, in June 2010. His motive stemmed from disapproval of his sister-in-law’s relationship,…
-
Vasant @ Girish Akbarasab Sanavale & Anr. v. The State of Karnataka
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court reversing the acquittal of the appellants-husband and mother-in-law of the deceased-wife and held them both guilty of offences under the Penal…
-
Ravi v. The State of Punjab
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court convicting the appellant-husband for the murder of his wife.
-
Raja Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the prosecution failed to prove the chain of circumstances leading to the guilt of the appellant-accused, beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Sovaran Singh Prajapati v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
a. Whether the Trial Court followed the basic requirements of a fairly conducted trial, in accordance with well-established prepositions of law, before imposing death sentence upon the Appellant/Accused? b. Whether the…
-
Wahid v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The appellants herein have preferred appeal against their conviction. Appellant-W was convicted by the Trial Court for offence punishable u/s.392 r/w. s.397 IPC and appellant-A was convicted u/s.392 r/w. s.397 IPC and…
-
Ashok Saxena v. The State of Uttarakhand Etc.
Whether the High Court committed any error in holding the appellant guilty of the offence of murder.
-
Gambhir Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
Matter pertains to the sustainability of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of conviction and death sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial court.
-
Thammaraya and Another v. The State of Karnataka
Whether the conviction of the appellants-accused under Sections 201 and 302 read with Section 34, Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable.
-
Irfan Alias Bhayu Mevati v. State of Madhya Pradesh
In a case where the trial court relied upon the DNA report, whether the non-examination of the scientific experts involved in the process of conducting DNA profiling examination and issuing the report, led to the…
-
Rakesh Kumar Raghuvanshi v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether the High Court erred in upholding the judgment of the trial court, thereby upholding the appellant guilty of conscious possession of poppy husk.
-
Sadashiv Dhondiram Patil v. The State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether Village Police Patil is a Police Officer in terms of s. 25 of the Evidence Act; and whether the High Court erred in holding the appellant guilty of the offence of murder.
-
Om Prakash @ Israel @ Raju @ Raju Das v. Union of India and Another
Issue arose as regards plea of juvenility raised u/s.9(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
-
Abdul Nassar v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Whether the prosecution has proved by leading clinching and convincing circumstantial evidence that the accused had committed forcible and violent sexual assault on the child victim and, thereafter, strangled and killed…
-
State of Maharashtra & Ors. v. Pradeep Yashwant Kokade & Anr.
Effect of delay in executing the death sentence.
-
Kunhimuhammed@Kunheethu v. The State of Kerala
Whether appellant had the intention to commit murder; whether the appellant’s act can be brought under section 304, IPC in light of the offence being committed in exercise of private defense and thereby exceeding the…
-
Ashok v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order of conviction and sentence against the appellant, for the offences punishable u/ss.376, 302, 201 IPC as also SC and ST Act 1989; and as regards the role of the Public…
-
The State of Karnataka v. Chandrasha
Issue as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court setting aside the conviction of the respondent-government servant u/ss.7 and 13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for…
-
Vijaya Singh & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand
Whether the Criminal Appeal filed by the Appellants challenging the conviction under Section 302/201 IPC can be entertained in the facts and circumstances of the case.
-
Suresh Chandra Tiwari & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand
(a) Whether the circumstances relied by the prosecution have been proved beyond reasonable doubt; (b) whether those circumstances are of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; (c)…
-
Uma & Anr. v. The State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police
Whether the High Court was able to demonstrate perversity and non-appreciation of the materials on record by the Trial Court while reversing its finding of acquittal.
-
Shyam Narayan Ram v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. Etc.
Whether the High Court fell in error in remanding the matter to Trial Court and giving liberty to the accused to cross-examine a prosecution witness and allowing the prosecution to lead further evidence in the form of…
-
Sandeep v. State of Uttarakhand
The Sessions Court found the appellant guilty of the offence u/s.302 r/w. s.34 IPC, convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions…
-
State (NCT) of Delhi v. Rajeev Sharma
Issue arose as to whether the courts below were justified in convicting the petitioners u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishonour of cheques and sentencing them to six months of simple imprisonment…
-
K. Vadivel v. K. Shanthi & Ors.
Under what circumstances could the power be invoked for further investigation and whether on the facts, further investigation was warranted.
-
V. Senthil Balaji v. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement
Matter pertains to grant of bail to former Tamil Nadu transport minister against whom complaint was filed for offence u/s.3 PMLA, which is punishable u/s.4 PMLA for his alleged involvement in the job racket scam.
-
Vijay Singh @ Vijay Kr. Sharma v. The State of Bihar
Issue arose as regards sustainablility of the findings of the High Court holding the appellants guilty of commission of offences u/ss. 302/34 and 364/34 IPC; as also the approach of the High Court, if in line with the…
-
Sunil @ Sonu Etc. v. State NCT of Delhi
Issue arose for consideration that as to whether the accused can be convicted for the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC or in the facts and circumstance of the case, the conviction needs to be altered to a lesser offence.
-
Shoor Singh & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand
High Court, if justified in acquitting the parents-in-laws and the husband of the victim-daughter-in-law of the offences punishable u/ss.304-B and 498-A IPC.
-
Nitya Nand v. State of U.P. & Anr.
Whether the prosecution could prove the charges against the appellant under Sections 148 and 302/149 IPC beyond reasonable doubt. Whether the appellant was a part of the unlawful assembly and if he actually took part in…
-
IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus
(i) When a Court deals with an appeal against an order of conviction, what are the essentials, which a judgment must contain; (ii) What was the duty of the High Court while ascertaining the offences u/s.6 of the…
-
Allarakha Habib Memon Etc. v. State of Gujarat
As per the FIR (Exhibit-79) there were two eyewitnesses to the incident, PW-12-Police Constable and PW-11-the first informant who was deceased’s cousin brother. PW-12 claiming to be an eyewitness to the incident had…
-
Sri Dattatraya v. Sharanappa
Whether the High Court had rightly affirmed the acquittal of the respondent in a complaint case moved for the offence punishable u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by its judgment dated 03.03.2023.
-
Raju and Another v. State of Uttarakhand
Whether the material on record unmistakably justifies the conviction of the appellant u/s. 307 IPC.
-
Mir Mustafa Ali Hasmi v. The State of A.P.
The question arose whether the prosecution was able to prove beyond all manner of doubt the fact that the appellant demanded and accepted bribe from the complainant; and whether the courts below were justified in…
-
Vinod Jaswantray Vyas (Dead) Through Lrs v. The State of Gujarat
The instant appeal is directed against the judgment dated 13.02.2017 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court, whereby, the Division Bench partly accepted the appeal preferred by the appellant accused-A1 and…
-
Gaurav Maini v. The State of Haryana
Courts below, if justified in convicting and sentencing the appellants for the offences punishable u/ss. 364A, 392 and 120B IPC.
-
Dharmendra Kumar @ Dhamma v. State of Madhya Pradesh
High Court if justified in upholding conviction and sentence of the appellant under ss. 302/34 IPC; the contradictions or discrepancies and the absence of blood group classification or inconclusive FSL results on the…
-
Naresh Kumar v. State of Delhi
Non-questioning the appellant convicted u/s.302 r/w s.34, Penal Code, 1860 on the twin incriminating circumstances during his examination u/s.313, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, if caused material prejudice to him…
-
Surender Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Correctness of the order of the High Court upholding the conviction and sentence of the appellant for offences under ss. 302 and 307 IPC .
-
Sunita Devi v. The State of Bihar & Anr.
Need for a comprehensive sentencing policy. Trial against the accused under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was conducted by the judicial officer in utmost haste and the accused was denied due…
-
Rajendra S/o Ramdas Kolhe v. State of Maharashtra
By the judgment and order dated 15.11.2010, the High Court relied upon the written dying declaration of the deceased Ex. 59 recorded by PW-6 and also the oral dying declarations of the deceased made before PW-2, PW-3,…
-
Sukhpal Singh v. NCT of Delhi
Appellant was convicted u/s.302, Penal Code, 1860 for the murder of his wife. Courts below whether justified in holding that the statement of Complainant-PW-1 recorded in proceedings u/s.299, Code of Criminal Procedure,…
-
Anees v. The State Govt. of NCT
Murder of appellant-accused’s wife in their house in which the appellant, deceased and their 5 year old daughter lived. s.106, Evidence Act, 1872 was invoked and the appellant was convicted u/s.302, IPC for the murder.…
-
Parteek Bansal v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Whether the High Court erred in not quashing FIR under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in a complaint alleging offences under Sections 498A, 406, 384, 420, and 120(B), Indian Penal Code, 1860, on the…
-
Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and Others v. State of Karnataka
Whether the High Court was justified in deciding the appeal as a first Court on independent appreciation of evidence and recording its own findings to hold the accused appellants (A-1, A-2 and A-3) guilty of charge u/s.…
-
Kirpal Singh v. State of Punjab
The appellant was convicted u/s. 302, s.307 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment for 5 years respectively. Both sentences were to run concurrently. An appeal preferred by the…
-
Thirumoorthy v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police
Appellant-accused, a Child in Conflict with Law on the date of the incident was convicted and sentenced u/ss.363, 342, 302, 201 r/w 302, IPC and s.6, POCSO Act. Trial, conviction and sentence of the appellant, if was…
-
Navas @ Mulanavas v. State of Kerala
Appellant-accused was held guilty for the offences punishable u/ ss.302, 449, 309, IPC and sentenced accordingly. For the offence punishable u/s.302, IPC, he was sentenced to death. High Court confirmed the conviction,…
-
XXXX v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another
High Court, if justified in dismissing the petition filed by the appellant u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR registered against him u/ss. 376 (2)(n) and 506 IPC.
-
Kumar @ Shiva Kumar v. State of Karnataka
Appellant was convicted for the offence u/s. 306 IPC by the trial Court and the conviction was upheld by the High Court. Whether the prosecution proved the charge of abetment to commit suicide u/s. 306 IPC against the…
-
Mohammed Khalid and Another v. The State of Telangana
Whether the High Court was justified in affirming the judgment of the trial court convicting and sentencing the accused appellants for the charge u/s. 8(c) r/w. s.20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic…
-
Shailesh Kumar v. State of U.P. (Now State of Uttarakhand)
What is the goal of investigation and what is the role of investigating officer; Are s.172 CrPC and ss. 145 & 161 of the Evidence Act to be read in consonance with each other; Can a General Diary entry precede the…
-
Thakore Umedsing Nathusing v. State of Gujarat
Scope of interference by High Court in an appeal challenging acquittal of the accused by the trial Court; standard of proof required to bring home charges in a case based purely on circumstantial evidence.