Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 2319 2012 SLD 2319 2012 YLR 112
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Appeal No. (s) 11 of 2011, decided on 28th July, 2011. DATE of hearing: 20th June, 2011
MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR AND GHULAM MUSTAFA MENGAL, JJ
Abdul Jalil Lehri for Appellants. Kamal Khan Kakar for P.G. for the State

MUHAMMAD BAKHSH and 3 others

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Criminal Trial--- ----Administration of justice---Courts of law were not to sit entirely unconcerned during the proceedings, nor was a court, holding a criminal trial expected to leave it to the contestants to do what they liked---Main purpose of the entire judicial proceedings was to find out truth, arrive at a correct decision; and to see that no innocent person was punished, merely because of certain technical omission (s) on his part; or on the part of his counsel---In case of capital punishment, accused must be given reasonable opportunity of rebutting the evidence so brought on record---Intentional or unintentional lapse on the part of complainant, prosecution counsel or defence counsel was not to be allowed to stand in the way of justice, because it had a bearing on the determination of guilt or innocence of accused---Such a power under Art.161, Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 and S.540, Cr.P.C. had been given to criminal court for the safe administration of justice---Fair and free administration of justice was primary and essentially an obligation cast on the courts of law constituted for the purpose. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.360---Qatl-e-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Administration of justice---Trial of the case had been conducted in violation of the settled principles of law, resulting in miscarriage of justice in a careless and ridiculous manner---Accused persons had been deprived of their fundamental rights to be defended by a proper counsel---Such practice, would not only shake the confidence of general public, but would also damage the noble profession of law in the eye of community---Statement of the prosecution witness had been recorded in violation of S.360, Cr.P.C., object of which was to obtain an accurate record from the witness of what he really meant to say; and to give him an opportunity of correcting the words which the court or his clerk had taken down---Before a deposition was closed, the evidence must be read over to the witness enabling him to protect himself against any inaccuracy in the words taken down from his lips---Serious prejudice had been caused to accused,…
🔒
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