Section 302 (b) Criminal Procedure (V9 1898), Section 540 Qatl e amd Definitions of Evidence Cross-version Trial Court did not perform its duties as required by law when a cross-case FIR record was sought had gone. Special request for defense, then, was the court's duty to investigate the business of the cross version but the prosecution failed to properly perform its work when cross-examination witnesses were banned. ? The correct picture will not emerge, as was done in this case, when the proceedings in the cross version were seriously interpreted, when the trial court did not see the explicit language of section PC40 Cr, CR, There were plenty of options. At any stage of the trial, the court will summon any witness whose trial was necessary for a fair decision in this case so that the extremes of justice can be met, and even more so for fair justice, the remand o f the case and Had become more important. In view of the awkward circumstances of the case where negligence and failure to perform the duty were identified, which attracted the attention of the court at the appellate stage, the conviction and sentencing sentence decided by the trial. Was separated. Remand was remanded for judgment of the case in three months after scrutinizing the required witnesses as per law
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
