Why Is the Examination of the Accused a Crucial Stage in a Criminal Trial?
Every criminal trial revolves around evidence, but justice demands that the accused must also get a direct opportunity to explain the circumstances appearing against them. This opportunity comes through the examination of the accused by the court.
Under the old criminal procedure framework, this stage was governed by Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC). With the introduction of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the corresponding provision is now Section 351 BNSS.
Although the core idea remains unchanged, the BNSS provision strengthens clarity, fairness, and judicial responsibility.
What Was the Purpose of Section 313 CrPC?
Section 313 CrPC empowered the court to question the accused after the prosecution evidence was completed. The main objective was to allow the accused to personally explain any incriminating circumstances.
Importantly, the accused answered these questions without oath. Since the law did not treat this examination as evidence, false answers did not amount to perjury.
This provision ensured that courts did not rely solely on prosecution evidence without hearing the accused’s version.
When Could the Court Examine the Accused Under Section 313 CrPC?
The court could examine the accused at two stages. First, at any point during the trial, if necessary. Second, mandatorily after the prosecution evidence concluded.
The law placed a duty on the court, not the accused. Even if the accused remained silent earlier, the court had to ask relevant questions before judgment.
Thus, Section 313 CrPC acted as a safeguard against one-sided adjudication.
How Did Courts Interpret Section 313 CrPC?
Indian courts consistently held that this examination is not a mere formality. Judges were required to put specific and clear questions covering all material circumstances.
If a court failed to examine the accused properly, appellate courts often treated it as a serious procedural irregularity.
Therefore, Section 313 CrPC played a direct role in protecting the accused’s right to a fair trial.
Why Did BNSS Replace Section 313 CrPC?
The BNSS aims to modernize criminal procedure while preserving fundamental safeguards. Lawmakers noticed that courts sometimes conducted Section 313 examinations mechanically.
Section 351 BNSS was introduced to reaffirm the importance of meaningful engagement with the accused. The change aligns with the broader BNSS objective of accountability and clarity in judicial processes.
What Does Section 351 BNSS Provide?
Section 351 BNSS authorizes the court to examine the accused after prosecution evidence is completed. The accused continues to answer without oath.
The provision allows the court to ask questions that directly relate to the evidence on record. Additionally, the accused may offer explanations in their own words.
Just like under CrPC, these answers do not constitute evidence but can be considered while appreciating the case.
Is There Any Major Difference Between Section 313 CrPC and Section 351 BNSS?
Structurally, both provisions are similar. However, the difference lies in legislative intent.
Section 351 BNSS fits within a framework that expects judges to actively ensure fairness. It discourages vague or generic questioning.
Moreover, BNSS emphasizes clarity in recording answers, which helps appellate courts assess whether the accused received a genuine opportunity to explain.
Can the Accused Remain Silent Under Section 351 BNSS?
Yes, the accused may choose not to answer certain questions. Silence alone cannot lead to conviction.
However, if the accused offers explanations, the court can consider them alongside other evidence.
This balance respects the right against self-incrimination while promoting truth-seeking.
How Does This Examination Affect the Outcome of the Trial?
The answers given by the accused can either weaken or strengthen the prosecution case. A convincing explanation may create reasonable doubt.
Conversely, evasive or inconsistent answers may support the prosecution’s version.
Therefore, Section 351 BNSS continues to act as a turning point in many criminal trials.
What Happens If the Court Skips This Examination?
Failure to examine the accused properly can vitiate the trial. Appellate courts may order a retrial or remand the matter.
BNSS reinforces the duty of trial courts to comply strictly with this requirement.
As a result, procedural fairness remains non-negotiable.
Why Is Section 351 BNSS Important for Criminal Justice Reform?
A fair trial demands not only evidence but also explanation. Section 351 BNSS preserves this principle while encouraging courts to move beyond routine questioning.
By strengthening judicial responsibility, the provision enhances public confidence in the criminal justice system.
Ultimately, it ensures that justice is not only done but also seen to be done.
Conclusion
Section 313 CrPC provided the accused with a vital opportunity to explain incriminating circumstances without fear of self-incrimination. Section 351 BNSS carries this safeguard forward with renewed clarity and purpose. While the procedural structure remains familiar, the BNSS framework expects courts to conduct this examination meaningfully. This continuity, combined with reform, strengthens fairness in criminal trials.
