Chapter XXIII
Section 281 CrPC: Record of examination of accused
New Law Update (2024)
Section 308 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Magistrate, Court of Session
Punishment
Procedural – Trial / Charge
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(1) Whenever the accused is examined by a Metropolitan Magistrate, the Magistrate shall make a memorandum of the substance of the examination of the accused in the language of the Court and such memorandum shall be signed by the Magistrate and shall form part of the record.
(2) Whenever the accused is examined by any Magistrate other than a Metropolitan Magistrate, or by a Court of Session, the whole of such examination, including every question put to him and every answer given by him, shall be recorded in full by the Presiding Judge or Magistrate himself or where he is unable to do so owing to a physical or other incapacity, under his direction and superintendence by an officer of the Court appointed by him in this behalf.
(3) The record shall, if practicable, be in the language in which the accused is examined or, if that is not practicable, in the language of the Court.
(4) The record shall be shown or read to the accused, or, if he does not understand the language in which it is written, shall be interpreted to him in a language which he understands, and he shall be at liberty to explain or add to his answers.
(5) It shall thereafter be signed by the accused and by the Magistrate or Presiding Judge, who shall certify under his own hand that the examination was taken in his presence and hearing and that the record contains a full and true account of the statement made by the accused.
(6) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to apply to the examination of an accused person in the course of a summary trial.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 281(2)
This sub-section mandates that when an accused is examined by any Magistrate other than a Metropolitan Magistrate or by a Court of Session, the entire examination, including every question and answer, must be recorded fully by the Presiding Judge or Magistrate themselves, or under their direct supervision if they are physically unable.
Section 281(4)
This crucial sub-section ensures fairness by requiring the recorded statement to be read or shown to the accused, and interpreted to them in a language they understand if necessary. It also grants the accused the liberty to clarify or add to their answers, safeguarding their right to explain their position accurately.
Landmark Judgements
Madan Lal v. State of Himachal Pradesh (1995):
The Supreme Court emphasized the critical importance of strictly adhering to the procedure laid down in Section 281, particularly subsection (2), requiring the entire examination, including questions and answers, to be recorded fully. Failure to comply meticulously with these provisions can lead to the vitiation of the trial.
Bhoop Ram v. State of U.P. (1974):
While primarily concerning the examination under Section 313 CrPC (corresponding to the old Section 342), this landmark judgment underscored that the examination of an accused is not a mere formality. It stressed the need for a fair and effective opportunity for the accused to explain incriminating circumstances, implicitly requiring a diligent and accurate record as per Section 281.
State of Punjab v. Ram Singh (2000):
The Supreme Court reiterated that the object of examining an accused under the CrPC is to afford them an opportunity to explain the circumstances appearing against them. It highlighted that the procedural safeguards outlined in Section 281 must be scrupulously followed to ensure a fair trial and that the recorded statement is a true reflection of the accused’s explanation.