MUHAMMAD SULEMAN vs MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM art — 2023 PLD 124 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 SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM art. 18---Production of documents---Scope---Under art. 18 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, the Court cannot refuse to admit the documents which are relevant for decision of the case---Parties, in view of O. XIII, Rr. 1 & 2, C.P.C., are required to attach with plaint all the documents on which reliance is placed, whereas there is no corresponding provision in Criminal Procedure Code for placing any embargo on the powers of the Court to receive any document at belated stage provided it is relevant under art. 18 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM Ss. 265-C & 241-a---Supply of statements and documents to the accused---Scope---Before commencement of the trial under Chap. XXIIa, Cr.P.C., in all cases instituted upon the police report, copies of the following documents are to be provided to the accused free of cost not later than 07 days before the commencement of the trial namely FIR, the police report, statements of all the witnesses recorded under Ss. 161 & 164, Cr.P.C. and inspection note recorded by the Investigating Officer on his first visit to the place of occurrence and note recorded by him on recovery memo, if any---In case of trial before the Magistrate, under Chap. XX, Cr.P.C., in all cases instituted upon police report except those tried summarily or punishable with fine or imprisonment not exceeding six months, copies of statement of witnesses recorded under Ss. 161 & 164, Cr.P.C. as well as inspection note recorded by Investigating Officer on his first visit to the place of occurrence shall be supplied free of cost to the accused not later than 07 days before the commencement of trial. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM Ss. 241-a & 244---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), art. 18---Evidence for prosecution---Supply of statements and documents to accused---Production of documents---Scope---accused, in a trial under S. 489-F, P.P.C., objected to the complainant's exhibition of certain original documents during his evidence, copies whereof had been provided to the police during the course of investigation---Magistrate sustained the objection and discarded the documents which formed part of the evidence---Complainant filed a revision petition before the Sessions Court, which was allowed---Held, that the police authorities ought to have taken the original bank receipts or at least complainant ought to have provided them during the course of investigation, however, even if the same was not done and subsequently during the course of trial the original documents were produced in evidence, there was no impediment in law which barred the prosecution from doing so---By virtue of art. 18 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, any evidence which proved the fact and issue was to be allowed by the Court---Mere admissibility of document in evidence did not necessarily prove it---Method to prove a document was altogether distinct from adducing it in evidence---Trial Court could not have discarded the documents---Revisional Court had rightly explained the position of law and no exception could be taken thereto---Writ petition was dismissed. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM Receiving a document in evidence and marking it as exhibit does not bar other party from questioning its admissibility later---Likewise, merely exhibiting a document does not dispense with the onus to prove the same---Admitting a document in evidence does not determine its evidentiary value nor does its admissibility attain finality; it only becomes part of the record and is marked as exhibit. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM art. 18---Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts---Documentary evidence, de-exhibiting of---Scope---No concept of de-exhibition of any document existed, however, if there is any objection as to the admissibility or proof of the document, same is to be decided by the Trial Court in accordance with law while adjudicating the matter and choose not to rely on documentary evidence as exhibited for the reasons recorded by it. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM Tendering document in evidence and making it does not per se prove the document and same is to be proved in accordance with the provisions of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM arts. 72, 73, 74, 75, 76 & 77---Documentary evidence---Proof of contents of documents---Primary evidence---Secondary evidence---Proof of documents by documentary evidence---Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given---Rules as to notice to produce---Scope---Contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence---article 73 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, explains evidence to mean the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court, whereas under art. 74, secondary evidence means and includes certified copies; copies made from the original by mechanism processes which in themselves ensure the accuracy of the copies; copies made from or compared with the original; counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them and oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it---article 75 clearly and in unambiguous terms states that documents must be proved by primary evidence except in the circumstances as mentioned in the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Exceptional circumstances in which secondary evidence can be admissible are contained in art. 76 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984; when the original is shown or appears to be in the possession or power of the person against whom the document is sought to be proved or of any person out of reach of, or not subject to, the process of the Court, or of any person legally bound to produce it; when the existence, condition or contents of the original have been proved to be admitted in writing by the person against whom it is proved or by his representative in interest; when the original has been destroyed or lost, or when the party offering evidence of its contents cannot, for any other reason not arising from his own default or neglect, produce it in reasonable time; when due to the volume or bulk of the original, copies thereof have been made by means of microfilming or other modern device; when the original is of such a nature as not to be easily moveable; when original is a public document as provided in art. 85; when original is a document of which a certified copy is permitted by the Order or by any other law; when the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot conveniently be examined in Court, and when original document forming part of a judicial record is not available and only certified copy thereof is available---article 77 states that secondary evidence of the contents of the documents as mentioned in art. 76 would not be given unless the party proposing to give such secondary evidence has previously given to the party in whose possession or power the document is or to his advocate such notice to produce it as is prescribed by law, and if no notice is prescribed by law, then such notice as the Court considers reasonable under the circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM Proof---Standard of proof in civil and criminal cases---Scope---Degree of proof required in the civil and criminal cases is different viz. in the former, mere preponderance of probability is sufficient and benefit of reasonable doubt need not necessarily go to the defendant but in the latter the persuasion of guilt must amount to such a moral certainty as convinces the minds of the tribunal, as reasonable men beyond all reasonable doubt. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM admissibility of document cannot be disputed or questioned on the ground that they are fabricated; it is for the Trial Court to determine at the time of decision whether they are reliable and genuine documents. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SULEMAN VS MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM art. 18---Production of documents---Scope---No bar existed to produce a document, especially when a particular question is asked by the defence to witness regarding the production of the same before the police during investigation---One may visualize a situation in which valuable documents may have been omitted to be placed on record by the Investigating Officer during investigation and yet in the interest of justice they may be admitted during trial---Mechanism of the Courts and procedure is only intended to advance the justice.

MUHAMMAD SULEMAN vs MUHAMMAD SAAD NASEEM art — 2023 PLD 124 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLD