In a packed Court No. 7 on Monday morning, the Supreme Court paused a nearly decade-old murder conviction from Bihar and sent it back to the trial court, saying the accused had been denied a basic, non-negotiable safeguard of criminal justice - the right to properly answer allegations in their own words. The bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh seemed visibly perturbed as they went through the record, especially the “carbon copy” statements that had passed as Section 313 examinations.
Background
The case involved the 2016 killing of Ghughali Pasi in Buxar district. According to the prosecution, the victim was returning from a field when he was surrounded and attacked with a katta and a sharp-edged weapon by several men, including appellants Chandan Pasi, Pappu Pasi, and Gidik Pasi.
Read also: Assam High Court Flags Gaps in Police Recruitment Policy for Transgender Applicants, Seeks Clarity
The trial court convicted six individuals in 2017 and sentenced them to life imprisonment. The Patna High Court affirmed the conviction in 2024, leaving the three appellants to approach the Supreme Court. Their main grievance: the trial court never properly questioned them about the evidence against them.
Court’s Observations
The hearing became tense as Justice Karol read aloud the Section 313 CrPC statements recorded by the trial court. Each statement had just four questions - two of them extremely broad - and the answers were almost identical.
“The bench observed, ‘How these statements passed muster is something we fail to understand.’”
Another remark, delivered with clear displeasure, noted that the prosecutor had also failed to assist the court. “The prosecutor is not supposed to behave like a cheerleader for conviction,” one of the judges commented during the exchange, “but as an officer of the court.”
Read also: Supreme Court Flags Serious Concerns Over Police Conduct in Madhya Pradesh Case, Seeks Affidavits
The bench reminded that Section 313 is not a ritual or a tick-box exercise. It allows the accused to personally explain every incriminating circumstance. If the court doesn’t put those circumstances to them, the trial itself becomes defective. The judges cited several precedents clarifying that improper or incomplete questioning can render an entire trial unfair.
Decision
Finding a “serious procedural lapse,” the Supreme Court set aside the conviction only for the three appellants and remanded their cases to the trial court. The fresh process is to begin strictly from the stage of recording proper Section 313 statements. The remaining accused will not be affected by this order.
Read also: Gujarat High Court Rejects State’s Appeal, Says Temple-Visit Quarrel Cannot Be Treated as Cruelty
The bench also directed the trial court to complete the exercise within four months, keeping in mind that the incident occurred nearly nine years ago.
With that, the appeals were allowed, and the matter was sent back for correction of the procedural error - and nothing more.
Case Title: Chandan Pasi & Others vs. State of Bihar
Case Number: Criminal Appeal Nos. 5137–5138 of 2025 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 3685–3686 of 2025)
Case Type: Criminal Appeal (Challenge to conviction and sentence)
Decision Date: 01 December 2025
