MIR FAIZ MUHAMMAD ALIAS MIR FAIZULLAH versus STATE
Sections 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 474 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (v. 1898), Articles 222 and 342, were used as fraudulent documents, forged as fake documents, and were deemed to be counterfeit. Intend to use the evidence provided by the trial court against the accused, did not disclose the date, time and manner in which the accused allegedly committed fraudulent documents. ? And used the same as genuine; while it was mandatory that the charge should include all of the above details as per the provisions of Section 222, CRPC Section 342, CRPC also contained the statement of the accused Was not filed under, the trial court merely re-presented the charge. As there was no other question about the preparation of fake and forged documents by the Question No 1 accused, the same inquiry report was presented in the evidence, the trial court did not pass on the evidence brought on the record, so as to put questions to the accused. Learn. By making the allegations, enabling the accused to explain the circumstances presented in the evidence against him, as well as the statement of the accused under Section 2, 2, CR PC, recorded in the trial court as per law. Was not done The case was remanded, with instructions to be strictly pursuant to Section 222, CR PC. And Section 2342, recording the statements of the accused under the CRPC, submitting all material presented by the prosecutor, in order to provide him with an opportunity to explain it, and then to know the qualifications in accordance with the law. Decide.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
