Abstract The often-overlooked provision of criminal law, which holds significant importance is section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. Section 313 grants the accused an opportunity to provide their statement, ensuring their right to be heard and preventing self-incrimination. This article explores the background, evolution, and objectives of section 313 CrPC, as well as its alignment with the principles of natural justice. The main aim of the article is to demonstrate how India still falls short in upholding the right to silence as per section 313, through a detailed analysis of various judgments passed by the Supreme Court of India, and laws enacted in other jurisdictions around the world. The article addresses the issue of Indian courts using adverse inferences from an accused person’s silence, which conflicts with Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution. It argues that drawing such inferences should be reconsidered by the courts, as it contradicts important legal principles and undermines the right to a fair trial.