| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 2088 2016 SLD 2088 2016 YLR 62 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Revision Application No. D-240 of 2014, decided on22-06-2015. Date of hearing: 21-04-2015.
MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR, JUSTICE AND SHOUKAT ALI M. MEMON, JUSTICE
Amjad Ali Sahito for Applicant.Inam Ali Malik and Meer M. Burero for the Complainant.Syed Meeral Shah Bukhari, D.P.G. for the State
Criminal Revision Application No. D-240 of 2014, decided on22-06-2015. Date of hearing: 21-04-2015.
MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR, JUSTICE AND SHOUKAT ALI M. MEMON, JUSTICE
Amjad Ali Sahito for Applicant.Inam Ali Malik and Meer M. Burero for the Complainant.Syed Meeral Shah Bukhari, D.P.G. for the State
SIKANDAR ALI LASHARI--ApplicantVS.THE STATE AND another--RespondentS
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 114, 109, 34 & 29---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Ss.6, 7, 21-H & 27-B---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss.265-C, 161, 164 & 173---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts.2(b) & 164---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts.4 & 10-A---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention, act of terrorism---Supply of copies of 'CDS' and 'USB' (Universal Serial Bus), application for---Dismissal of application by Trial Court---Validity---Video cassette, fell within the purview of 'document', for the reason that definition of document contained in S.29, P.P.C. and Art.2(b) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, left no doubt that video cassette fell within the purview of matter expressed or described upon any substance by means of letters, figures or marks---Trial Court, had found that in order to avoid manipulation or alteration, generally a manuscript of the recording, was supplied to accused; and decided that video and CD or USB, would be played and heard after recording of evidence of both the sides in the open court; where accused could note down things, and file objections; and the court could pass any appropriate order for deciding objection; or could consider those objections at the time of writing ---Much emphasis was made in the impugned order that CD and USB would be played/watched and heard in the open court after recording of evidence of both the sides---Validity---Trial Court tried a case in which capital punishment could be awarded, if the charge was proved---Incumbent upon the Trial Court to provide fair and reasonable opportunity of defence to accused, which was also a basic and foremost prerequisite of administration of criminal justice---To enjoy the protection of law and to be treated in accordance with law, was inalienable right of every citizen of Pakistan under Arts.4 & 10-A of the Constitution---Trial Court had refused to supply the copy of CD and USB, which was not only against the mandate and command of Arts.4 & 10-A of the Constitution but also in violation of norms of administration of justice---Findings of the Trial Court were perverse and misconstrued---Once the typed/written transcripts ofโฆ