*THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO +CRIMINAL PETITION No.527 of 2011 %Dated 24-01-2011 # Bollam Chandraiah …. Petitioner VERSUS $ The State of A.P. … Respondent ! Counsel for Petitioner: C.Praveen Kumar ^Counsel for Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor <GIST: >HEAD NOTE: ? Cases referred: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.527 OF 2011 DATED 24th JANUARY, 2011. BETWEEN : Bollam Chandraiah .. Petitioner-accused and The State of A.P. ..Respondent THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.527 OF 2011 ORDER: This criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is filed by the petitioner-accused seeking to direct the Principal Sessions Judge, Nalgonda, to allow the petitioner, who is the accused in S.C.No.266 of 2009, to file a written statement instead of answering the questions framed under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Heard. Petitioner before this Court filed an application in Crl.M.P.No.1618 of 2010 before the concerned Court under Section 313 (5) Cr.P.C. amended provision by which he seeks permission of the Court to file his written statement to answer the questions under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The learned trial Judge disposed of the application stating that the petitioner can answer orally and also file written statement. Learned senior counsel challenging the said order submitted before this Court that the intention of the Legislature in amending the provision under Section 313 (5) Cr.P.C. is to enable the accused person to file written statement on the basis of the questions prepared by the Court with the help of the Prosecutor and defence counsel, which enables the accused person to file a written statement. He further submits that the Law Commission also recommended for the said amendment in which it is stated as follows : “We are of the view that the Court can take assistance of the prosecutor and defence counsel and prepare the questions which are to be put in a concise form to the accused under section 313. The Court can also permit the filing of written statements by the accused as sufficient compliance with section 313.” On the basis of the said recommendation, the Legislature amended the Act as follows: “313 (5) The Court may take help of Prosecutor and Defence Counsel in preparing relevant questions which are to be put to the accused and the Court may permit filing of written statement by the accused as sufficient compliance of this section.” In the said amendment the word “also” recommended by the Law Commission is omitted, which clearly indicates the intention of the Legislature. This Court also perused the entire records and also the orders passed by the learned trial Judge. This Court is of the view that when there is a specific amendment to the said provision which enable the accused to file his written statement to the questions put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., there is no necessity to compel the accused to answer before the Court orally also. When the accused himself is not inclined to answer orally and wants to submit himself for filing the written statement, there is nothing wrong in permitting the accused to file the written statement. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be aside. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the learned trial Judge is directed to accept the written statement of the petitioner- accused on the basis of the questionnaire prepared under Section 313 Cr.P.C. With above observation, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions filed in this Criminal Petition, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Dated : 24.01.2011 Note : L.R. Copy to be marked B/o. sur