9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 1382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Belagavi, dated 14.12.2018 preferred this revision petition. 2. Heard the arguments of both sides. 3. On careful perusal of oral and documentary evidence placed on record by complainant, it would go to show that complainant entered into a registered agreement of sale dated 25.09.2014 with accused for purchasing flat No. 5 in Gowri Apartments for total consideration of Rs. 15,00,000/- Out of the said consideration amount complainant paid an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-. However, the sale deed was not executed by accused. Complainant issued notice dated 07.06.2017 to execute the sale deed by receiving balance consideration. Accused gave evasive reply dated 26.07.2017. However, accused issued cheque dated 22.06.2017 for Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct and held that it is an irregularity under Section 465 of Cr.P.C. which does not prejudice the defence of accused in any manner and the said finding has no recognition under law. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent seeks to justify the judgment of both Courts below and contended that no any case has been made out by accused having caused any prejudice to the approach adopted by both the Courts below. 7. Learned counsel for accused relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Ashraf Ali vs. State of Assam reported in (2008) 16 SCC 328, wherein it has been observed and held that, "Section 313 of the Code casts a duty on the Court to put in any enquiry or trial questions to the accused for the purpose of enabling him to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecorded on the day of his appearance based on the examination in chief of complainant alone. PW.2 has also been examined subsequent to the recording of Section 313 statement of Cr.P.C. The First Appellate Court has recorded finding that in terms of Section 465 of Cr.P.C., non-framing of any questions on the evidence of PW.2 during the course of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. is mere irregularity and does not prejudice the defence of accused. 9. The Trial Court referred the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Indian Bank Association case referred above for recording statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. on the day of appearance of accused in response to summons. On careful reading of the said judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e witnesses for prosecution have been examined and before he is called on for his defence in every enquiry or trial. The object and purpose behind it is to enable the accused personally to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him. The non-compliance of this mandate of law is not a mere irregularity as observed and held by the First Appellate Court in terms of Section 465 of Cr.P.C. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforementioned Ashraf Ali's case has emphasized the object and purpose of examining the accused in terms of Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and non- compliance of mandate under the said proviso would cause prejudice to the accused. 11. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Shivaji Burma Govekar vs. Deepak Basa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
