Criminal Procedure Code (CCPC) Criminal Code of Conduct (V9 1898), Section 439 The High Court will interfere with the lower court's formal order when severe procedural injustice is only likely to be dealt with. ? An interlocutory injunction to deal with the question of just one procedure, when a High Court has the power to interfere with the proceedings of the lower court at any stage, should be exercised sparingly and only then. When serious injustice is likely.
P. L. D. 1949 Baluchistan, 20
Before Saker, J. C.
FAQIR MUHAMMAD‑Accused‑Petitioner
Versus
CROWN‑Complainant‑Respondent
Criminal Revision No 18 of 1949, decided on 16th August 1949, under section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code for revision of an order of the Sessions Judge is Baluchistan, dated 20th June 1949.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 439---High Court will interfere with an interlocutory order of lower Court dealing with a question of procedure only when grave injustice is likely to be done.
This petition has been filed against an interlocutory order dealing with a question of procedure only. While a High Court has power to interfere with the proceedings of a lower Court at any stage, that power must be used very sparingly and only when grave injustice is likely to be done.
Order
Saker J. C ---‑Section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code confers a right on an accused person to confront a witness with his statement made to the police while section 115 of the Evidence Act defines the manner in which the statement can be used for purposes of contradiction.
It would not however be proper for a pleader to expect a Court to note every inconsistency of a witness under cross‑examination. Such inconsis tencies will be recorded in the evidence on record and the pleader will have the opportunity of drawing the attention of the Court to such contradictions or inconsistencies at the time he argues the case.
This petition has been filed against an interlocutory order dealing wit a question of procedure only. While a High Court has power to interfere with the proceedings of a lower Court at any stage that power must be used very sparingly and only when grave injustice is likely to be done These circum stances do not appear to be present in this cage. The order of the lower Court, of which revision is sought, does not amount to final judgment in the case and the petitioner will have the opportunity, if so advised, to raise this question in the event of his appealing against the judgment of the lower Court.
For the reasons given above, I decline to accept the petition.
A. H. Revision rejected.
Related judgments — Judicial Commissioner Court Balochistan, 1949
