Hazrat Usman vs State S — 2025 PCrLJ 130 ISLAMABAD

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

Hazrat Usman VS State S. 9(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 94 & 540---Police Rules, 1934, Rr. 22.3 & 22.4---Possession of narcotic substances---Summoning of documents---Scope---Application for the summoning of daily dairy and register No. 19 of Moharar Malkhana was dismissed---Petitioners were facing trial in a criminal case, which was at the stage of recording of prosecution witnesses---Examination-in-chief of Moharar Malkhana had been recorded, whereas, during cross-examination of that witness, the petitioners filed two applications i.e. (i) for examination of the signatures of Investigating Officer from the handwriting expert, and (ii) for the summoning of a daily diary dated 07.10.2022 and register No.19 maintained at the Police Station under the relevant rules---Trial Court dismissed the first application i.e. examination of signatures by a handwriting expert, with the observation that petitioners were required to file the said application "at early stage of case", whereas, the second application i.e. for summoning of daily dairy and register No.19, it was concluded that "if the accused has any doubt regarding entries in the daily diary and register No.19, then he had the right to file complaint against the Police Officials before their high-ups in police department"---Trial Court, therefore, dismissed both the applications---Validity---Trial Court is empowered to summon any person as a witness if his evidence appears to be essential for the just decision of the case within the purview of S.540, Cr.P.C.---Object underlying S.540, Cr.P.C, is that there may not be a failure of justice on account of the mistake of either party in bringing the valuable evidence on record or leaving ambiguity in the statements of the witnesses examined from either side---Accused has every right to shatter the credibility of the witnesses by advancing his defense and to require the production of documents, necessary to ascertain the truthfulness of the criminal charge levelled against him, provided that the accused makes an application at the appropriate stage provided by law---In the present case, the trial was at the stage of S.265-F(2), Cr.P.C and the Court was taking evidence produced in the support of prosecution---Trial Court should proceed with the trial in the manner contemplated by the provisions of that said section---Accused would be at liberty to file applications for the summoning of Daily Diary dated 07-10-2022 and Register No.19, and for comparison of signatures of Investigating Officer at the stage when S.265-F(7), Cr.P.C. came into play---At such stage of trial, even if the petitioners did not opt to lead defence evidence, they would be at liberty to file applications under S.94, Cr.P.C.---Trial Court should decide the applications (if any) strictly in accordance with the law with regard to the admissibility and relevancy of evidence---Revision petitions were disposed of accordingly.

Hazrat Usman vs State S — 2025 PCrLJ 130 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ