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

Citation Name: 2023 PLD 160 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MOHIBULLAH vs State S — 2023 PLD 160 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2023 PLD 160 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
PLD
Parties
Citation Name: 2023 PLD 160 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MOHIBULLAH vs State S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 172---Q; S. 161; Criminal Procedure Code

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

Citation Name: 2023 PLD 160 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MOHIBULLAH VS State S. 172---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 140 & 157---Diary of proceedings in investigation---Cross-examination as previous statements in writing---Right of adverse party as to writing used to refresh memory---Scope---Section 172 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 deals with police diaries---Said section mentions that the investigation officer shall enter into it the day-to-day record of his investigation---It further mentions that the Court may send for the diaries; Court may use such diaries, not as evidence in the case but to aid in the inquiry or trial; the accused is neither entitled to use such diaries nor entitled to see them; the provisions of Arts. 157 & 140 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 shall apply if the police officer who made them refreshes his memory or the court uses the diary to contradict such officer---Police diary is essentially a confidential record that the accused cannot see or use as evidence---However, the accused is entitled to use it when the court questions the witness about that diary or the police officer refreshes his memory---Only that police officer can use it to refresh his memory who has made the diary. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 160 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MOHIBULLAH VS State art. 155---Refreshing memory---Scope---Petition called for the evaluation of an order by the Trial Court that dismissed the defense objection to allowing the prosecution witness to refresh his memory from the police record---Trial Court did not follow the legally acceptable procedure of permitting a witness to refresh his memory---Prior to reading the record, the witness did not mention any memory lapse or the need for a document to jog his memory, which is a prerequisite for invoking art. 155 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---No request was made from the prosecutor or the witness to establish the foundation for memory recall---Witness, being an eyewitness to the recovery, was expected to testify from his own memory in the witness box, rather than relying on the police or judicial file authored by someone else---However, the Trial Court allowed the witness to record his evidence while having access to the police file---Instead of using the record to stimulate the witness's memory, if needed, the Trial Court permitted unrestricted access to the entire file, regardless of the nature of the documents---Witness recited information directly from the record, without any restrictions on when or where he could read it---allowing the probative value of the recorded statement to prevail would be prejudicial to the rights of the accused and would infringe upon a fair trial---Impugned order was set aside; the Trial Court was directed to re-record the evidence of the witness in accordance with the law and the previously recorded statement in the case was declared to have no legal effect. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 160 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MOHIBULLAH VS State arts. 155 &156---Refreshing memory---Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in art. 155---Scope---Pre-condition for admissibility of the past recollection recorded from art. 156 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, is that the witness is sure that the facts were correctly recorded in the document that is used to refresh memory. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 160 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MOHIBULLAH VS State Ss. 161 & 162---Examination of witnesses by police---Statement to police not to be signed---Use of such statement in evidence---Scope---Statements recorded under S. 161, Cr.P.C., can only be used for contradiction---Section 162, Cr.P.C. explicitly provides it.

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLD

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