A criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC sought quashing of the Additional Sessions Judge's order rejecting an application to correct a clerical error in the petitioner's Section 313 statement. The court dismissed the petition.
This petition stands dismissed at this motion stage itself.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010194262018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet. 922/2018
1:MADHURJYA BORAH
S/O. SRI KHAGEN BORAH, R/O. SISUMORA BORKURUKANI GAON, P.S. TINGKHONG, DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM-786612.
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY PP, ASSAM.
2:BHULA BORAH S/O. SRI KHAGESWAR BORAH R/O. SISUMORA BORKURUKANI GAON P.S. TINGKHONG DIST. DIBRUGARH ASSAM-786612
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA
ORDER
Date : 01-10-2018
This is an application, under Section 482 of the Cr.PC, seeking quashment of the order, dated 10.07.2018, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC), Dibrugarh in Sessions Case No. 115/2014 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to correct words in the statement of the petitioner, recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.PC.
Page No.# 2/2
Heard Mr. AK Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. S Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State respondent No. 1.
I have perused the petition as well as the annexures furnished therewith.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that while recording statement of the accused-petitioner, in a particular question the word “friends” is written instead of the word “in-law’s”. The petitioner made an application before the learned trial court to replace the said word “friends” by the word “in-law’s” as indicated above, but the same was rejected. The statement, already recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.PC, cannot be modified in a subsequent stage and law does not permit that.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in fact, while answering the question, the petitioner/accused answered “in-law’s” and not “friends”. But, the learned court recorded the word “friends” instead of “in-law’s”.
Sub-Section (3) of Section 313 of the Cr.PC provides that the accused shall not render himself to punishment, interalia, by giving a false answer. Such being the law, as provided in Section 313(3) of the Cr.PC and in the absence of any law placed before this court, enabling this court to permit correction/ modification of the statement already recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.PC, this court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order, dated 10.07.2018, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC), Dibrugarh in Sessions Case No. 115/2014, referred to above.
Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed at this motion stage itself.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an application to correct a clerical error in the Statement recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC can be entertained after the trial stage.
Whether the Trial Court can allow modification of a statement already recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC.
Interpretation of Section 313(3) of the CrPC regarding false answers and subsequent modifications.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Madhurjya Borah
The State of Assam
Hitesh Kumar Sarma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
