IMDAD ULLAH vs State arts — 2025 PLD 512 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

IMDAD ULLAH VS State arts. 3 & 17---Witness and competency---Voir dire test---applicability---Child witness---Scope---Child is competent to be a witness if he possesses capability and intelligence to understand and respond rationally to questions - a criterion known as the "voir dire test"---Satisfaction of the Court in terms of art. 3 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 is not a mere procedural formality but a legal obligation and must be discharged with utmost care and caution. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 512 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case IMDAD ULLAH VS State S. 377-B---Child abuse---Trial---Testimony of child/victim---Evaluation of child's testimony as a victim of sexual abuse requires a thorough and balanced approach to ensure protection of their rights and interests while upholding principles of justice---Absence of corroboration should not automatically discredit child's testimony in such cases---Tender age of child, combined with other case specific circumstances, such as demeanour and unlikelihood of tutoring may make corroboration unnecessary---This is a factual consideration in each case---Courts must acknowledge that children may respond to trauma of abuse in diverse ways, which may include confusion, fear or emotional distress---Sexual abuse of a child can take form of penetrative or non-penetrative acts---Non-penetrative cases pose more significant challenges, especially in our societal context---This category has a heightened risk of false accusation and judges must determine guilt or innocence of accused by thoroughly examining all available evidence, considering surrounding circumstances and adhering to applicable legal standards---Conviction based on uncorroborated testimony of a child victim of sexual abuse is legally possible but its viability depends on circumstances of the case and strength of child's testimony. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 512 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case IMDAD ULLAH VS State Child witness---approach of Courts---When a child engages with the judicial system, the response should be supportive, collaborative and aligned with a child-right-driven approach---Involvement with legal system can take various forms, such as being party in legal case, acting as a witness, undergoing legal proceedings or seeking legal remedies---This approach is based on acknowledging children as rights holders and vulnerable individuals, emphasizing crucial need to establish an environment that prioritizes their well-being and protection throughout legal processes. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 512 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case IMDAD ULLAH VS State Hearsay---Connotation---Principles of trustworthiness and necessity---Applicability---Hearsay evidence is given by a witness consisting of a report of something which someone else has said rather than a statement of something the witness has actually seen or experienced---Certain hearsay statements can carry reliability even without subjecting original declarant to cross-examination---Trustworthiness can be established from circumstances under which statement was made, guaranteeing a level of reliability comparable to that found in a statement that has undergone cross-examination---There are situations where applying cross-examination test is impossible- such as in cases where the declarant has died and it becomes necessary to consider the statement in its untested form if it is to be used at all---Exceptions to hearsay rule are based on two fundamental principles: trustworthiness and necessity. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 512 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case IMDAD ULLAH VS State Ss. 3 & 18---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 377-B---Child molestation---Appreciation of evidence---Delay in registration of FIR---Inconsequential---Overly technical objections by defense---Accused was alleged to have committed sodomy with the victim child---Trial Court convicted the accused and sentenced him to imprisonment for fourteen years---Plea raised by accused was that Trial Court did not sign judgment as Special Court and there was unexplained delay of two days in registration of FIR---Validity---Not signing of judgment as Special Judge was an objection overly technical as the Judge was duly notified and had jurisdiction in the matter---Law generally encourages prompt reporting of crimes---Courts recognize that child abuse is a sensitive issue---Several factors can contribute to delay in reporting child sexual abuse, including fear, shame, threats from perpetrator or lack of awareness---Delay in making such reports to police are not material unless circumstances are such that they warrant an adverse view---Legal system aims to balance need to protect children from abuse with the principles of fairness and due process---Accused failed to refer to any circumstances which required taking an adverse view against prosecution because of the delay---Complainant was victim's father while prosecution witness was paternal uncle who had adopted the victim---Prosecution witnesses did not harbour any ill will towards accused that could serve as a motive for falsely implicating him in the present case---Statements of prosecution witnesses were in line with testimony of victim providing consistent and corroborative evidence---Child sexual abuse is a deeply traumatic and sensitive issue that demands that justice system handle such cases with exceptional care and consideration for unique needs and vulnerabilities of child victims---Parliament passed Anti-Rape (Investigation and Trial) Act, 2021 to effectively deal with rape and sexual abuse offences (enumerated in Schedule thereof) but some of its provisions had not been implemented since promulgation---High Court directed Federal Government to immediately review the steps taken to implement Anti-Rape (Investigation and Trial) Act, 2021 and ensure that requisite systems were in place---High Court directed Trial Courts to exercise extreme caution when writing judgments and must identify victims using acronyms rather than full names---High Court declined to interfere in conviction and sentence awarded by Trial Court to accused---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

IMDAD ULLAH vs State arts — 2025 PLD 512 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD