Karnataka HC: Accused Facing Murder Charges Entitled to Cross-Examine Investigating Officer Before Section 313 Statement

The High Court of Karnataka has intervened in a murder trial to ensure the right to a fair defense, ruling that a trial court must permit the recall of an Investigating Officer for further cross-examination in serious offenses if the recording of the accused's statement has not yet commenced. This decision reinforces the principle that procedural technicalities should not overshadow the substantive rights of an accused facing the highest penalties of law.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna presided over the matter, hearing a challenge against a Sessions Court order that had prioritized the age of a case over the necessity of material cross-examination. The Court navigated the tension between the need for speedy trials and the constitutional mandate of providing a reasonable opportunity for defense in heinous crimes.

The Intersection of Section 311 and Section 313 Procedures

The Court addressed the timing of applications to recall witnesses, noting that while such requests are generally not entertained after the commencement of recording the statement of the accused, exceptions must be made based on the gravity of the charges. The petitioner, accused of murder, sought to recall the Police Inspector (PW-22) to address vital aspects omitted during previous cross-examination.

In its reasoning, the Court observed: "...the application ought to have merited consideration in the light of the offence being the one punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, to give one opportunity to the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to allow the application filed with a rider that the petitioner cannot avail any benefit of this order, in the event, recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C, has begun on or completed."

Court's Directions to the Sessions Judge

The Court has the following directions:

"[I] Criminal Petition is allowed.

[II] The order dated 15.06.2026 in SC.No.759/2016 passed by LXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-66), Bengaluru, stands quashed.

[III] The application filed by the petitioner stands allowed, subject to the condition observed hereinabove.

[IV] The concerned Court shall see that the cross-examination gets completed on a single day and not permit the petitioner to drag the proceedings any further."

Background:

The dispute originated from a 2016 murder case registered at Yeshwanthpura Police Station, where the petitioner was named as Accused No. 1. During the trial in SC.No.759/2016, the prosecution's evidence concluded in January 2026. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to recall the Police Inspector (PW-22) for further cross-examination, claiming crucial questions were missed. The Sessions Court rejected this on June 15, 2026, citing the 2016 vintage of the case and the fact that it was posted for Section 313 statements.

The High Court, however, found the Sessions Court's order "bereft of reasons" regarding the nature of the offense. It held that while the delay was noted, the gravity of a charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code necessitated one final opportunity for the accused. The petition was allowed, quashing the lower court's order and permitting the recall, provided the 313 statement process had not already begun.

Case Details:
Case No.: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10259 OF 2026
NeutralCitation: 2026:KHC:37874
Case Title: SRI. RAVI @ GOBI RAVI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): SRI. PARASHURAM HATTARAKIHAL, ADVOCATE
For the Respondent(s): SMT. WAHEEDA M.M, HCGP

Source: 2026 CaseBase(KAR) 1490