Section 2 30un law evidence (10 of 1984 1984), Arts 132 and 140 convictions faced with the cross examination, the preceding statement, the trial court, the accused confronted the complainant during his cross-examination with his earlier statement. Was not allowed, it was not binding. The cross-examination is only to the extent that the Chief stated in his examinations by the witness, but it is his right to ask the witness any question to present his credibility as well as to bring the correct and relevant facts to the record. The witness was not brought to the record either. Or the intentional value of this statement of any witness was to be determined by the court at the time of the final decision, the accused could not be denied to confront the complainant in his previous statement while the trial court erroneously fell While the applicant refused to complain to his ex. By the trial court's order that was untenable and unresponsive to put the High Court aside in the review process, the illegal jurisdiction was allowed under the circumstances in the order passed by the trial court review.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
