K.C.Bhargava - (1.) THIS is a revision against the order dated 16.8.83 passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge remanding the proceedings to try afresh from the stage of recording statement of accused under Section 313, Cr. P.C.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the revisionists as well as learned Government Advocate has been heard. Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that in the present case the Trial court had convicted the accused persons and sentenced them, against which they filed an appeal. The appeal was allowed and the case was remanded back as mentioned above. Aggrieved by this order, the appellants-revisionists have filed the present revision challenging the validity of the remand order passed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge. According to the learned counsel for the applicants, the remand order could not have been passed on the facts and circumstances of the case. According to the learned counsel, the court has not correctly interpreted the provisions of Section 313, Cr. P.C, Section 313, Cr. P.C., provides for examination of the accused and deals with the power of the court.
(3.) SUB-clause (a) of Section 313 (1) provides that the court may ask any question from the accused at any stage of the trial. SUB-clause (b) deals with the questioning of the accused generally on the case after prosecution witnesses are examined. In the present case the court, after the evidence of the prosecution was over, examined the accused by putting only one question as to what he has to say about the evidence given by the witnesses and the documents on record. Other question was about production of evidence in defence and any other material on which he relies. The learned court below has held that the words question him generally on the case' appearing in Sub-clause (b) of Section 313 (1) does not mean that only a single question should be asked.;