| Case ID |
1f5a551f-f12b-4606-8be1-6ce97e662976 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Revision No. 72656 of 2019 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 21, 2020 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court allowed the revision petition and set aside the impugned order of the Anti-Terrorism Court which improperly admitted the supplementary statement of the complainant during his examination-in-chief. The court found that the trial court committed material illegality in its decision, emphasizing that once a crime report is lodged, any information gathered subsequently must be treated as a statement under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which can be used for contradiction under Section 162. Thus, the order allowing the exhibition of the supplementary statement was quashed. |
| Summary |
This case highlights the procedural aspects of the Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), particularly Sections 161 and 162, relating to the examination of witnesses and the admissibility of statements during trials. The Lahore High Court's ruling underscored the importance of adhering to legal protocols regarding the exhibition of supplementary statements. The court's decision reinforces the principles of fair trial and the rights of the accused to challenge evidence presented against them. Keywords like 'Criminal Procedure Code', 'examination of witnesses', 'legal representation', and 'trial court decisions' are significant in understanding the nuances of this case. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN, JUSTICE,
JAVAID GHURAL, JUSTICE
|
| Lawyers |
Navid Inayat Malik,
Muhammad Siddique Zafar Qadri
|
| Petitioners |
TAHIR ABBAS
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE AND 2 OTHERS
|
| Citations |
2021 SLD 771 = 2021 PCRLJ 504
|
| Other Citations |
2008 YLR 1092,
2016 PCr.LJ 220,
2014 MLD 337
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
|
| Sections |
161,
162
|