| Case ID |
2d5d924c-d6f7-447a-ab01-67b05b3bca59 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Revision No. 191 of 2017 |
| Decision Date |
|
| Hearing Date |
Dec 21, 2017 |
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court reviewed Criminal Revision No. 191 of 2017, wherein the petitioner, Asad Nawaz, challenged the trial court's decision to allow the re-examination of Dr. Ishtiaq Hussain, the primary witness, before the defense's cross-examination. The High Court acknowledged that while Section 540 of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers the court to re-examine witnesses, the procedure and order prescribed by Articles 132 and 133 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order were not adhered to. Specifically, the trial court did not conduct the defense's cross-examination prior to allowing the prosecution's re-examination of the witness. Consequently, the High Court directed that the defense should first be granted the opportunity to cross-examine the witness, followed by any re-examination as deemed necessary. This ensures adherence to the proper sequence of witness examination, maintaining the integrity of the judicial process. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Criminal Revision No. 191 of 2017, heard by the Lahore High Court on December 21, 2017, petitioner Asad Nawaz challenged the trial court's decision to permit the re-examination of Dr. Ishtiaq Hussain before the defense could conduct a cross-examination. The case centered around the application of Section 540 of the Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), which allows courts to re-examine witnesses. However, the petitioner argued that the trial court's action violated the procedural guidelines outlined in Articles 132 and 133 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order of 1984, which prescribe the order and method of witness examination, including examination-in-chief, cross-examination, and re-examination. The Lahore High Court, presided over by Justice Muhammad Tariq Abbasi, meticulously reviewed the arguments presented by both parties. The prosecution, represented by Sh. Istajabat Ali and Dil Pazeer, ASI, contended that the trial court acted within its legal authority under Section 540, emphasizing the necessity of re-examining the witness to incorporate critical evidence. Conversely, the petitioner’s lawyer, Malik Waheed Anjum, highlighted the procedural discrepancy, asserting that re-examination prior to the defense's cross-examination undermined the fairness of the trial process. After a comprehensive analysis of the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, the High Court concluded that while the trial court was correct in its intention to re-examine the witness, it failed to follow the prescribed sequence of procedures. Therefore, the court mandated that the defense should first undertake the cross-examination of the witness, followed by any necessary re-examination. This decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding procedural integrity and ensuring balanced testimonial examinations. The ruling not only rectifies the immediate procedural oversight but also reinforces the foundational principles of fair trial by mandating the correct order of witness examinations. The case highlights the critical interplay between statutory provisions and procedural rules, emphasizing the necessity for courts to adhere strictly to established legal frameworks to maintain the sanctity of judicial proceedings. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Dr. Ishtiaq Hussain,
Hassan Abdal,
District Attock,
Irfan Afzal Khan
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD TARIQ ABBASI
|
| Lawyers |
Malik Waheed Anjum,
Sh. Istajabat Ali,
Dil Pazeer, ASI
|
| Petitioners |
ASAD NAWAZ
|
| Respondents |
ZULFIQAR AFZAL KHAN AND OTHERS
|
| Citations |
2019 SLD 1330,
2019 PCRLJ 883
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860,
Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
|
| Sections |
540,
34,
302,
132,
133
|