CrPC Section 315 - Accused Person To Be Competent Witness

Section 315 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “CrPC”) is one of the vital provisions of law which provides the legal framework for the competence of the accused to testify in his trial. It explains the circumstances where an accused can testify on his own behalf, the procedural safeguards that accompany this, and the limitations surrounding the use of his testimony or lack thereof in a criminal trial. This provision balances the rights of an accused with the needs of a fair and just trial.

Legal Provision Of CrPC Section 315

“Section 315: Accused Person To Be Competent Witness-

1. Any person accused of an offence before a Criminal Court shall be a competent witness for the defence and may give evidence on oath in disproof of the charges made against him or any person charged together with him at the same trial.

Provided that -

(a) he shall not be called as a witness except on his own request in writing;

(b) his failure to give evidence shall not be made the subject of any comment by any of the parties or the Court or give rise to any presumption against himself or any person charged together with him at the same trial.

2. Any person against whom proceedings are instituted in any Criminal Court under Section 98, Section 107, Section 108, Section 109, Section 110, or under Chapter IX or under Part B, Part C or Part D of Chapter X, may offer himself as a witness in such proceedings.

Provided that in proceedings under Section 108, Section 109 or Section 110, the failure of such person to give evidence shall not be made the subject of any comment by any of the parties or the Court or give rise to any presumption against him or any other person proceeded against together with him at the same inquiry.”

Key Provisions Of CrPC Section 315

Section 315 is further bifurcated into two subsections, each dealing with the varied aspects relating to an accused's right to tender himself as a witness in a criminal trial. Section 315 allows the accused to testify in his own defence. This right is given with significant safeguards so that adverse consequences do not befall him in case he declines to do so.

Section 315(1): Competency Of The Accused As A Witness

Section 315(1) creates the basic principle that an accused, like any other witness, is competent to testify on his own behalf. The essential elements of this Section are:

• Competency: The accused is competent to testify on his own behalf; therefore, the Court cannot disqualify such a person from taking witness stand if they choose to do so.
• Voluntary Testimony: The accused can give his testimony “for disproof of charges” brought against him. This lets the accused disprove the allegations first-hand by providing his version under oath before a Court.
• Oath: As with other witnesses, the accused is also made to give his version under an oath so that his version meets the same standards of truth as any other witness with liability for committing perjury.

Requirements of Testimony

However, this faculty is not absolute or automatic. The proviso to Section 315(1) contains following important safeguards:

• Accused Cannot Be Forced to Testify: This provision protects the right of an accused to remain silent. No one, neither the prosecution nor the Court, shall force an accused to take the witness stand. The choice to testify should be made by the accused independently and should be expressed in writing. This guarantees the right of self-incrimination, a core tenet of criminal jurisprudence, is not violated.
• No Adverse Inference from Silence: This clause further strengthens the protection to the accused by prohibiting any presumptions against him in case he chooses not to testify. Neither can any adverse inference be drawn by the Court nor by the parties concerned against the accused from the latter's silence. It safeguards the right of silence of the accused and shuts all doors for an unfair trial due to drawing adverse inferences from the choice to not testify.

Section 315(2): Testimony In Special Proceedings

Section 315(2) expands the right to give testimony to persons subjected to some quasi-criminal proceedings by certain Sections of the CrPC. Section 315(2) deals with people subjected to preventive actions or quasi-criminal proceedings by the CrPC, such as:

• Section 98: Proceedings for the restoration of abducted or wrongfully detained women.
• Sections 107-110: Preventive measures to prevent breach of peace, disturbance to public tranquillity, or habitual criminal actions.
• Chapter IX: Proceeding relating to maintenance of wives, children, and parents.
• Chapter X: Maintenance of public order and tranquillity.

In these types of proceedings, the respondent may also offer himself as a witness. However, just like in criminal trials, the decision to testify is voluntary, and no one can be forced to take the stand.

No Adverse Inference in Specific Preventive Proceedings

The proviso to Section 315(2) prevents any adverse inferences or presumptions being drawn against such a person who chooses not to give evidence under Sections 108, 109 and 110. This constitutes a similar protection to that afforded by Section 315(1) and preserves the fairness of such quasi-criminal hearings.

Legal Principles And Rationale Behind Section 315

Section 315 preserves some of the basic criminal law principles that guarantee the administration of justice and fair process in criminal proceedings, including:

• Right of Silence and Against Self-Incrimination: Right to silence of an accused is one of the pillars of criminal law. This right is embodied by Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution to protect people from being a witness against themselves. Hence, Section 315 reinforces the same rights and states that no accused shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
• Voluntary Testimony: Section 315 provides for the right of the accused to give evidence when, having been given an opportunity to do so or aware of the nature of the charge against him, he considers it would tend to establish his innocence. However, this Section ensures that this is done voluntarily and not under any compulsion or coercion. The necessity of a written request adds a degree of procedural protection, ensuring that the decision of the accused is informed and voluntary.
• No Adverse Presumption from Silence: The right to silence is meaningful only when adverse inferences cannot be drawn out of the decision of the accused not to testify. If a Court or a party can draw adverse inferences from an accused's silence, then the right to silence would turn out to be a mere slogan.
• Equality of Arms: Section 315 of the CrPC provides that justice will be given based on fairness; hence, an accused person is allowed to defend himself before a Court of law. Simply put, if an accused person wants to testify in his defence, rather than solely depending upon the legal counsel or other witnesses, the law allows the same.

Case Laws On CrPC Section 315

State Of M.P vs. Ramesh And Anr (2011)

The Court while discussing Section 315 of CrPC held that:

• Section 315 of CrPC provides that an accused is entitled to give evidence in their own defence to disprove the allegations against him. However, for that purpose, the accused has to make a written offer to show his willingness to provide evidence.
• When the accused is willing to testify, they are willing to go into the witness box. They will be sworn in and subjected to cross-examination by prosecution and any other accused accomplices there may be.

Raj Kumar Singh @ Raju @ Batya vs. State Of Rajasthan (2013)

In this case, the Court explained the role of Section 315 of the CrPC and its interaction with Section 313. It held as follows:

• The Court explained that the purpose of examining the accused under Section 313 is to meet the requirements of the principles of natural justice: audi alterum partem (right to be heard). This means that the accused may be asked to explain the incriminating circumstances associated with him and the Court must take note of such an explanation.
• This helps to determine whether the chain of circumstances is full in a case that relies on circumstantial evidence.
• Those circumstances put to the accused in their examination under Section 313 cannot be used against them and have to be excluded from consideration
• The accused cannot be compelled to give evidence to disprove charges against him: this is his right under Section 315.
• However, if they wish, they can testify under oath to disprove charges levied against them.
• If the accused gives his testimony under oath, then the version of the events provided by the accused can be tested during cross-examination.

The Court concluded that a statement made under Section 313 is not substantive evidence and can only be used to appreciate the evidence led by the prosecution. It cannot substitute for the evidence by the prosecution. If the evidence of prosecution is insufficient to sustain conviction, the inculpatory part of a statement made under Section 313 cannot be the sole basis for conviction.

Abdul Razak @ Abu Ahmed vs. Union Of India (2021)

The Court declared that Section 315 of CrPC is an exception to the general rule of no self-incrimination and, hence, must be strictly construed. It shall apply only when the accused person elects to be a witness on his behalf to deny charges against himself or his co-accused in the same trial. Such an election must be made in writing by the accused.

Here, the additional witness, Shajahan, was being summoned for the prosecution and not for the defence; hence, Section 315 did not come into play. The Court observed that the prosecution was trying to utilise the testimony of Shajahan by presenting him before the Court in order to prove its case against the petitioner, which is not permissible under Section 315.

The Court held that the provision excluding an accused from being examined as a witness for the prosecution was also justified by Section 4(2) of the Oaths Act of 1969. The said Section prohibits administering an oath to an accused in criminal proceedings except where he is a defence witness.

Soni Anilkumar Prahladbhai vs. State Of Gujarat (2022)

It was found by the Court that, under Section 315 of the CrPC, an accused can be considered a competent witness only after making a written application to the Court.

• This petitioner in this case filed his application to seek the Court's acceptance of their examination-in-chief.
• However, they failed to make a written request for being treated as a witness under Section 315.
• Therefore, the Court held that both lower Courts are well justified in their decision to decline accepting the examination-in-chief of the petitioner.

Drawbacks In Enforcing CrPC Section 315

• Risk of Self-Incrimination: Accused can unintentionally incriminate himself during cross-examination.
• Defence Dilemma: The strategic decision to testify or remain silent during a trial can pose several risks to an accused since silence could cause bias despite its legal protection.
• Prejudicial Inferences: Courts can often subconsciously harbour feelings against an accused who refused to testify
• Complexity in Multi-Accused Trials: Who testifies and who does not can cause imbalanced perceptions in cases that involve more than one accused.
• Lack of Awareness: Many accused lack awareness of their rights or the risk they run in testifying.

Conclusion

Section 315 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is an important Section that safeguards the interest of the accused in criminal proceedings. This allows the accused to proceed with his defence while protecting his fundamental right against self-incrimination. The provision taken into consideration will prevent any adverse inference or presumptions being drawn in case an accused wishes not to testify. This provision ensures that criminal trials remain fair and just. This provision has its roots in Constitutional principles and, therefore helps in maintaining the integrity of the justice system while giving the defendant an opportunity to directly refute the allegations made against him.