Name: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, (PO No. 10 of ). Country: Pakistan. Subject(s): Civil, commercial and family law. Type of legislation: Regulation. An exhaustive commentary on the Qanun-e-Shahadat order, case law and Imprint: Lahore: Pakistan Law Times Publications: Stockist al-Qanoon. 14 Feb One fact is said_____ to another when the one is connected with the other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of Qanun-e-Shahadat.
|Published (Last):||28 November 2017|
|PDF File Size:||14.81 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.81 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Birth certificates being not clear were rightly discarded by Courts below. P L D Lahore Report pkistan Magistrate would be enough to justify attraction of Art.
The communication, being made in furtherance of a criminal purpose, is not protected from disclosure. Statement made by an independent witness of murder occurrence would be relevant under Art. The term “identification” means. The proof must rest on evidence. Boycotting meeting of the Parliamentary Party by itself would not be enough of a reason to pakostan the M.
Depositions taken by Magistrate who was incompetent to do so, cannot be transferred under provisions of Art. Where parties had not brought forward any expert witness to given opinion about genuineness of signatures in question, trial Court would be competent to form its own opinion by comparing disputed signatures with admitted signature.
The E-mail Address es you entered is are not in a valid format. Provided that no such answer, which a witness shall be compelled to give, shall subject him to any arrest or prosecution, or be proved against him in any criminal proceedings, except a prosecution for giving false evidence by such answer.
Document, by any law, was required to be attested, production of attesting witness, if alive, held, was mandatory requirement-In absence of such requirement under any law for attestation of document by a witness, there would be no legal requirement to produce attesting witness to prove such document.
Placing any fetters on witness may detain him from deposing truth or at least all that he knows about the point in issue and the same might misdirect the course of justice. Rule of plea of alibi is applicable in. Power-of-attorney was thus, a forged pakistann and person executing sale-deed on basis thereof, had no authority to execute any sale-deed on behalf of the owner plaintiff. Person holding purported power-of-attorney did not pakishan in Court xhahadat contest suit by the owner plaintiff.
Not admissible in law.
Held; There was no warrant for Courts below to have kept such death entry apkistan of consideration. Admission by party to proceeding or his agent, etc. Place of occurrence known to everyone and site plan having been prepared prior to the pointation of the same by the accused, such pointation could not be treated as a discovery to bring it within the four corners of Art.
Courts, however, as a rule of prudence seeking corroboration in material particulars of evidence of an accomplice before making it basis of conviction. Likewise, certified copy of a document forming part of judicial proceedings can be produced to prove the document. Evidence Islamic law View all subjects. Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when relevant: Such persons would not be presumed to have special means of knowledge as to the relationship of parties concerned.
The fact that other persons, who were poisoned by that poison, exhibited certain symptoms which experts affirm or deny to be the symptoms of that poison, is relevant. Unfair shahadar allegedly used in examination. Powers of Court Court, in certain eventualities was enjoined with powers to itself compare signatures alongwith other relevant material to effectively resolve main controversy. Rules of evidence for civil and criminal cases, are, in general, identical but some provisions in Qanun-e-Shahadat are peculiar to criminal cases while others are peculiar to civil cases.
You already recently rated this item. Veracity of statement of plaintiff about the pedigree of her father was not challenged in cross-examination. Reference can be made to clauses af and i of the Article which deals with the cases where the original is in possession of any person out of reach of Court and not subject to process of Court or where the original document is a public document within the meaning of Article 85 or forms part of judicial record.
Pakistan – Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, (PO No. 10 of ).
The facts that B procured arms in Europe for the purpose of the conspiracy, C collected money in Peshawar for a like object, D persuaded persons to join the conspiracy in Karachi.
Law of Evidence was amended and replaced with Qanun-e-Shahadat in order to bring it with. Defendant in default of clear objection at appropriate time was precluded from objecting to mode of qaunn regarding admission of opinion of expert or his examination on commission pakitan revision.
Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence: Nor relevant neither needs any sport of other evidence. Re-cross examine that witness. Pakistan PLD Lah.
P L D Karachi Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in Article The fact that, at the time when the bond was alleged to be made, B required only for a particular purpose, is relevant.
Certificates issued by such officials carried title weight for they were not produced as witnesses to be subjected to cross-examination because it could not be inferred otherwise as to what extent contents of their certificate could be relied upon. The facts that, shortly before the robbery, B went to a fair with money in his possession, and that he showed it or mentioned the fact that he had it, to third person, are relevant.
Nothing in this Article shall be taken to exempt any advocate from giving evidence of any matter of which he may be compelled to give evidence under Article 9. Three Courts below misread evidence on the question whether plaintiffs were daughters of vendors and failed to give proper consideration to material facts which had direct bearing on such question.
If it refers to a fact which could be heard, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he heard it. A may prove these statements, because they would be admissible between third parties, if he were dead, under Article 46, paragraph 2.
The facts that the dog had previously bitten X, Y and Z and that they had made complaints to B, are relevant.