Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 1920 2023 PLD 528 2023 SLD 1920
Lahore High Court
Criminal Revision No. 23556 of 2022, heard on 31st January, 2023.Date of hearing: 31st January, 2023.
Before Aalia Neelum and Farooq Haider, JJ
Abid Mehmood Sandhu and M. Usman Hanif Qureshi for Petitioner. Ms. Amera Salam, Assistant Attorney General for the State. Nemo (Although name of learned counsel for respondents Nos.2 to 5 reflects in the Daily Cause List issued for today as apprised by

ZAHEER AHMED---Petitioner

VERSUS

JUDGE, SPECIAL COURT and others---Respondents

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 161

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 94,540

Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 161---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 94 540---High Court (Lahore) Rules and Orders, Volume III, Chap. 1-E, R.2---Evidence, summoning/examining of---Lacuna, filling of---Disputed signatures on bank cheques---Withdrawal of amount through two cheques from two bank accounts of deceased father of the petitioner/ complainant was disclosed to him---Petitioner/complainant filed complaint before the Special Court (Offences in Respect of Banks) against accused persons alleging that they managed forged signatures on the disputed cheques as his octogenarian ailing father was bed-ridden and unable to sign any cheque---After summoning of the accused persons by the Trial Court, the Petitioner/complainant moved an application to send record available with the banks to the Punjab Forensic Science Agency for comparison of disputed signatures on cheques-in-question with the original/admitted signatures of his late father having been put/taken at the time of opening of bank account on Specimen Signatures Cards (SS Card)---Trial Court dismissed the application moved by the petitioner/complainant---Contention of the petitioner/complainant was that comparison of the signatures prayed for was necessary for just decision of the case---Validity---Entire controversy in the present case revolved around the disputed signatures of the petitioner s father on cheques which were encashed from the banks---Criminal justice system was not adversarial rather inquisitorial and the Court had to reach at just decision of the case, any piece of evidence which was essential for just decision of the case had to be brought on record irrespective of the fact that either the same would have favoured one party or the other---Similarly, filling lacuna in the case was immaterial if said piece of evidence was otherwise necessary for securing ends of justice---Dealing with recording of evidence in criminal cases under Chapter-E of Volume III of the High Court (Lahore) Rules and Orders, its R. 2 prescribed the duty of the Court to elucidate facts while Art. 161 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 gave wide powers to the judge to put question or to order production in…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492