PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

WAQAS alias KASHI vs State Ss — 2022 PLD 319 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2022 PLD 319 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2022
Reporter
PLD
Parties
WAQAS alias KASHI vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 540

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

Judgment text as reported

WAQAS alias KASHI VS State Ss. 540 & 439---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 150---Revision---Witness, summoning of---Word 'may' and 'shall'---Scope---Witness, status of---Question to own witness---Principle---Accused was aggrieved of summoning of two prosecution witnesses not included in calendar of witnesses by investigating officer---Validity---Trial Court was authorized under S. 540, Cr.P.C. to use discretion for summoning of any person as witness at any stage of an inquiry, trial or other proceedings---For stages, the Legislature used the word 'may' which meant that an essential witness whose summoning, the Court had considered was not appropriate at any preliminary or intermediate stage, the Court could decline to issue process for his appearance---Such order could be reviewed at a later stage if evidence of such witness had become essential for just decision of the case and in such case it was imperative on the Court for which the word 'shall' had been used in later part of S.540, Cr.P.C.---Witness called and examined or recalled or re-examined under S.540, Cr.P.C. was to retain his character as a prosecution or defence witness and he would be a Court witness simpliciter if he was cited neither a prosecution witness nor a defence witness---If any given up prosecution witness or defence witness was recalled, Court could allow respective party to put question to their own witnesses under Art. 150 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, which was not meant for asking questions only to hostile or resiled witnesses---High Court declined to interfere in order in question as Trial Court adopted right course by summoning related witnesses to decide actual fact in issue---High Court directed that it was duty of Trial Court to supply copies of statements of such witnesses to accused and complainant for the purposes of cross-examination on such witness so as to avoid bring on record any evidence by surprise---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLD

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English