| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 4496 = 2026 SLD 4496 = PLJ 2026 283 |
Supreme Appellate Court, Pakistan
Crl. Ps. Nos. 1033 & 1036, Crl. Misc. Appln. No. 1207 in Crl. P.L.A. No. 1033 of 2024
Presented By: Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Salahuddin Panhwar JUDGE
Mr. Saeed Khurshid Ahmad, ASC for Petitioner (in both cases) a/w Petitioner in person Mr. Siraj Ali Khan Chandio, Addl. PG Sindh for State (in both cases). Rana Abid Nazir, ASC for
Respondent No. 2 (in both cases). N.R. for
Respondents No. 3-4 (in both cases) Date of hearing: 23.6.2026.
Crl. Ps. Nos. 1033 & 1036, Crl. Misc. Appln. No. 1207 in Crl. P.L.A. No. 1033 of 2024
Presented By: Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Salahuddin Panhwar JUDGE
Mr. Saeed Khurshid Ahmad, ASC for Petitioner (in both cases) a/w Petitioner in person Mr. Siraj Ali Khan Chandio, Addl. PG Sindh for State (in both cases). Rana Abid Nazir, ASC for
Respondent No. 2 (in both cases). N.R. for
Respondents No. 3-4 (in both cases) Date of hearing: 23.6.2026.
Mst. NAYAB--Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE through P.G. Sindh and others--Respondents
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 360(1) , 360(2), 435
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 10-A
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 360(1) & (2)--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 10-A--Criminal Procedure--Recording of evidence--Correction of witness’s statement--Scope--Recording of statement of witness-Statement recorded through video link--Written statement not recorded verbatim--Discrepancies between video recording and written statement--Rectification--Fair trial and due process--Section 360(1), Cr.P.C. requires that after completion of testimony, the statement be read over to the witness in the presence of the accused or his counsel and, where necessary, corrected--Object is to ensure that the witness’s statement is accurately recorded and any mistake occurring during its recording is rectified before signatures are obtained--Where a witness challenges correctness of the written record, S. 360(2), Cr.P.C. enables the Court to make a memorandum of the objection, record its own remarks and incorporate the correct version--Such procedure promotes fairness and transparency and safeguards the constitutional right to fair trial under Art. 10-A--Procedural law is an instrument for advancing rather than frustrating justice. [P. 286] A Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 360(2)--Criminal Procedure--Video-recorded testimony--Material discrepancy--Duty of Trial Court--Evidence recorded through video link--Incorrect transcription--Date of occurrence wrongly recorded--Material discrepancies and inaccuracies--Duty of Court to rectify record--Petitioner stated in her video-recorded testimony that the incident occurred on 31-05-2018, whereas the Trial Court recorded the date as 30-05-2018 and other discrepancies were also found--Supreme Court examined the video recording and found material inaccuracies in the written statement--Counsel for respondent conceded such discrepancies--Where a witness specifically asserts that her testimony has not been recorded verbatim, the Trial Court must exercise jurisdiction under S. 360(2), Cr.P.C.--Failure to address such objection may seriously impair the evidentiary value of the statement and prejudice the merits of the…