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

Majid Javed alias Javed Ali vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 472 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2026 PCrLJ 472 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2026
Reporter
PCRLJ
Parties
Majid Javed alias Javed Ali vs State S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 540---Q; S. 302; Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

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

Majid Javed alias Javed Ali VS State S. 540---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 24---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Summoning of witness---Scope---Application filed by the petitioner for summoning of Control Room Wireless Operator/Moharrar as Court witness was dismissed---Validity---Petitioner/accused had sought the summoning of Control Room Wireless Operator/Moharrar along with record/register regarding Rapts dated 18.05.2023 as Court Witness maintaining that on the said date, three calls were made at Rescue 15 with the report that one person inflicted injuries to another person and according to the 3rd call an information was laid to the effect that one person gave information that somebody made fire shot at his cousin, who passed away at hospital---Said witness and record was essential for a just decision of the case---Petitioner/accused claimed that according to calls made to Rescue 15 on 18.05.2023, no person was mentioned as accused, as such its production was necessary for the just decision of the case---Said documents/Rapts were relevant under Art.24 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Summoning, production and use of the said documents may make the the existence or non-existence of a fact highly probable or improbable, as such were essential for the just decision of the case---"Just" means right, fair and well founded---Moreover, it is always duty of the Court to make every effort that no aspect of the case should be left unattended, therefore, the Trial Court, while passing the impugned order dated 17.05.2025, refusing to summon the said witness along with record, committed material irregularity---Trial Court failed to exercise discretion judiciously and did not record any substantial reason for rejecting the application, despite the witness being relevant and material---Revision petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ

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