Syed WAJID ALI SHAH vs State S — 2022 MLD 1740 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Syed WAJID ALI SHAH VS State S.540---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 337-H(2) & 34---Qatil-i-amd, rash or negligent act to endanger human life or personal safety of others, common intention---Summoning of witnesses---Scope---Application filed by complainant for summoning of witnesses who had already been examined was declined---Validity---Complainant intended to re-examine/cross-examine some of the important prosecution witnesses i.e. Investigating Officer, ASI and Inspector---Admittedly, said witnesses had been examined and cross-examined---Application for recalling said witnesses was moved after considerable delay---Complainant had shown his anxiety regarding some portion of the deposition of the said witnesses as such he intended to cross-examine them on that particular portion of their evidence---Under the provision of Art.150 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, the Trial Court might permit a party to cross-examine his own witness but for invoking the said provision, such permission must be sought at the very time when the witness was still under oath and had deposed something contrary to the interest of the party who had produced him---If the court considered that the witnesses was speaking the truth and he was not deposing in a twisted manner and contrary to his previous statement proposefully, then the court might refuse to allow such a request---In the present case, the application was moved after weeks even months of the examination of the witnesses, as such, it was not considerable---Case of the complainant was that some important prosecution witnesses during recording of their evidence had given testimony, which was inconsistent with the interest of the complainant---In such a situation, a prosecution witness could not be impeached by declaring him hostile and permitting the counsel for the complainant or even the public prosecutor to cross-examine the said witness---Prosecution and complainant could only be justified in seeking the impeachment of a prosecution witness when during his examination-in-chief or cross-examination, he had given testimony, which was inconsistent with some previous statement by him---In the present case, the investigator and the other official witnesses had not deposed anything, which was inconsistent with any of their previous statement, as such it would not be justified to subject them to cross-examine by the complainant or public prosecutor---Revision application was dismissed.

Syed WAJID ALI SHAH vs State S — 2022 MLD 1740 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 MLD