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

MUHAMMAD RIZWAN vs State Ss — 2022 YLRN 203 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2022 YLRN 203 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2022
Parties
MUHAMMAD RIZWAN vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 265-F; 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

MUHAMMAD RIZWAN VS State Ss. 540, 265-F & 561-a---Power to summon material witness or examine person present, evidence for prosecution---applicant/accused had challenged the letters whereby Trial Court had made complaint against the prosecutor of the case for giving up material prosecution witnesses--- Scope--- Prosecution had the prerogative to examine the witnesses, which it considered necessary in proving the charge, so evident from S. 265-F, Cr.P.C.---Court could not compel the prosecution or complainant, as the case might be, to produce the witness which the Court thought necessary at such stage, however, it would never be an excuse in exercising jurisdiction under S.540, Cr.P.C., if the court came to an opinion that evidence of any person was necessary for just decision of the case---High Court observed that normally, court (s) should not make such kind of complaint during trial proceedings, however, would be justified to make observations regarding conduct of any officials, associated/ attached with conduct of the trial of the case, which included but was not limited to witnesses alone---Proper course for Trial Court was always to have proceeded with the case which included exercise of jurisdiction provided by S.540, Cr.P.C. and to discuss that issue in the judgment---Prosecution or defense had right to examine witnesses in proof or disproof---Only objection which one could present was detailed in subsection (3) of S. 265-F, Cr.P.C.---Court might refuse to summon any such witness if it was of the opinion that such witness was being called for the purpose of vexation or delay or defeating the ends of justice---Such right, nowhere, allowed either sides to compel production of witness of his/its choice by his/its rival---No prejudice had been caused to accused nor he was competent to challenge the said letters, which could have been challenged by the prosecution itself---Petition being devoid of merits was dismissed along with pending applications.

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