Mst. YASMEEN vs MUHAMMAD ISHFAQ S — 2022 YLR 459 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-COURT

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

Mst. YASMEEN VS MUHAMMAD ISHFAQ S. 7---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 367---Commission of offence of Qazf---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal--- Language and contents of judgment---Scope---Accused was charged for levelling allegation containing imputation of zina against the complainant---Record showed that the adopted procedure by the Trial Court run contrary to law and normal procedure as evidence without recording examination-in-chief on oath could not be considered as evidence---Impugned judgment had been rendered on the strength of defective evidence---Points for determination had not been formulated in terms of S.367, Cr.P.C.---As a general rule of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, only such statement was legal and admissible which was given during the course of judicial proceedings and was on oath and was taken by a person authorized under the law to take down the evidence and that it was made in the presence of the adverse party, giving the right to the adverse party to cross-examine the statement of such deponent---Admittedly, the statements of three witnesses including complainant were not recorded in accordance with law---Such statements providing opportunity of cross-examination at a subsequent stage, could not have been appreciated either way on account of being violative of mandatory procedure---Section 367, Cr.P.C. indicated that a judgment must contain point or points for determination, the decision thereon and reasons for the decisions---Said section of the Code casted duty upon courts to formulate/point for determination and the court while writing judgment had to ponder over all possible situation and probabilities for drawing just decision---Section 367, Cr.P.C. was not permissive but imperative, thus, it was the duty of the judge to ensure not only that he dispensed justice but the justice also seemed to have been done---Provision of said section was mandatory and intended to constitute a substance as distinguished from mere form of judgment---Mis-appreciation of evidence leading towards illegality, gross irregularity, perversity or infirmity or finding of the Trial Court based on surmises, conjectures, shocking or artificial, warranted interference by the Appellate Court as contemplated by S.417, Cr.P.C.---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances, by setting aside impugned judgment and the case was remitted to the Trial Court for de novo trial after affording fair opportunities to the parties to lead their evidence in accordance with law.

Mst. YASMEEN vs MUHAMMAD ISHFAQ S — 2022 YLR 459 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 YLR