MUHAMMAD MAROOF vs State S — 2022 YLR 478 ISLAMABAD

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

MUHAMMAD MAROOF VS State S. 540--- Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 379, 427, 452, 506 (ii), 148 & 149---Theft, mischief causing damage, house trespass with preparation to cause hurt, criminal intimidation and rioting armed with deadly weapons---Additional evidence, recording of---Principle---Petitioner/complainant intended to producing additional evidence on the plea that proposed witnesses were eye-witnesses nominated in FIR but police did not record their statements---Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court dismissed application and revision petition filed by complainant---Validity---Trial Court could not summarily dismiss application for additional evidence in terms of S.540, Cr.P.C. by merely holding that either proposed witnesses were not mentioned in challan or that it was belated application or that it was filed to fill up lacunas in prosecution case, unless totality of material placed before it was considered to find out whether examination of the witnesses was essential for a just decision of the case--- Names of persons mentioned in application under S.540, Cr.P.C. were already mentioned in FIR as eye-witnesses, if their statements were recorded by Trial Court, no prejudice would be caused but if their statements were not allowed to be recorded, petitioner / complainant could suffer from such act and could not get proper justice from Court of law/Trial Court---High Court set aside orders passed by two Courts below and remanded the matter to Trial Court for affording one opportunity to petitioner/complainant produce witnesses mentioned in application---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD MAROOF vs State S — 2022 YLR 478 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 YLR