Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898

Section: 342, 340(2), 423

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 20

Law: Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961

Section: 6(5)

 SUMMARY The petitioner challenged the appellate court’s decision which, instead of acquitting him, remanded the case to the trial court due to failure to record his statement under Section 342 Cr.P.C. The Court held that recording of statement under Section 342 Cr.P.C. is mandatory and its omission vitiates the conviction. However, such omission does not automatically result in acquittal. Under Section 423 Cr.P.C., the appellate court has discretion to either: Acquit the accused, or Remand the case to cure the defect The appropriate course depends on facts, prejudice caused, and interests of justice. Since the omission was attributable to the trial court, applying the maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit (act of court shall prejudice no one), the appellate court rightly remanded the matter to record the statement and proceed from that stage. Thus, the writ petition was dismissed, and remand order upheld. TAG LINE Non-recording of statement under Section 342 Cr.P.C. vitiates conviction but does not mandate acquittal; remand is a lawful corrective remedy. Raheel Kamran J:-Through the instant petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (“the Constitution”), the petitioner calls in question the consolidated judgment dated 27.01.2026 passed by the Additional District Judge, Lahore. By way of the said judgment, the petitioner’s appeal against conviction and sentence was allowed and as a result, the judgment dated 09.09.2025 passed by the Judge Family Court, Lahore while acting as Judicial Magistrate in terms of Section 20 of the Family Courts Act, 1964 was set aside and the matter was remanded to the trial Court for the limited purpose of recording of statement of the petitioner/accused under Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (“Cr.P.C.”) and for proceeding thereafter in accordance with law. Respondent No.2/complainant also preferred an appeal assailing the said judgment and sought enhancement of sentence of the petitioner. Although the matter was filed and…