As per case facts, the appellant (accused no.2) was convicted for murder and attempt to murder with criminal conspiracy. The prosecution alleged he was part of a conspiracy to intimidate ... and murder, specifically by standing near a gate with a country-made handgun while others entered a house. Doubts arose about one witness's testimony, and another made no statement against him, leaving only one witness whose testimony about the appellant's specific role was relied upon. The question arose whether the trial court's failure to put this sole incriminating circumstance to the appellant during his Section 313 CrPC examination caused prejudice and vitiated the conviction. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that not confronting the appellant with the only incriminating evidence denied him a fair opportunity to explain, causing serious prejudice. Considering the significant delay since the incident and the appellant's long incarceration, remanding the case for re-examination was deemed unjust. The Court emphasized the criticality of proper Section 313 CrPC examination, setting aside the appellant's conviction and sentence.