An uneducated person, though innocent, is as much computed, than not understanding the information of the charge.
Evidence being against him, an irrelevant statement tends to strengthen the presumption of his guilt. A few straightforward and pertinent questions would clear away such misunderstanding and enable him to understand the case, to state his bona fide defence, and to know what witnesses to call to support it. An old offender, more practised in the ways of the law, if caught, therefore makes a plain statement which a few questions would dispose of.
I consider then that an interrogation conducted fairly by the Magistrate, after the accused has made his statement, if he has made one, before committal would be of great service in eliciting the truth.
I entertain more doubt about allowing such interrogation at the trial. I refer to James Stephen's book, which states that it would tend to intimidate the prisoner.
No man who examines a wriggling witness and is really quite impartial...
I would allow interrogation by Counsel for the prosecution at the end of the case for the prosecution and before the prisoner's defence.
I confess to preferring interrogation by the Court to the latter mode of proceeding, and I do not believe that a fair, impartial Judge would be impaired by putting a few questions with a view to elicit the truth and clear up doubtful parts of the case.
I.W. Ball, Esq., would permit the Judge to interrogate in Court, though he would not allow it to a Magistrate.
All this shows the difficulty of examination at the trial, and I am disposed to think that substantial benefit will have been attained by the interrogation of the Magistrate, as the case of the accused will then be made known.
By the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure, sec. 202, it is in the discretion of the Magistrate at any stage of the inquiry to examine the accused person and to put such questions to him as he may consider necessary, in the interest of the accused to answer such questions.
By sec. 205, the examination of the accused is fully recorded and read out as evidence on the trial.
At the close of the case for the prosecution, the Judge may put any question he thinks proper, and it is in the discretion of the accused person to answer.
Page 486
Ver. 373.
373
The Judge at the close of the case for the prosecution on behalf of the record, or if no such evidence is produced, at the close of the case for the prosecution may put any question he thinks proper, and it is in the discretion of the accused person to answer.
It will not impair the impartiality of the Judge.
W 4
Page 487