Article 78 Contempt of Conduct (XLV of 1860), Sections 302, 324, 148, 149 and 109 Qatil amd, AMD's attempt to murder, mischief, common item, recording of the second evidence, challenged the order of the trial court to the applicant. Under which the chief constable was summoned to record his statement as secondary evidence. During the trial, it has been revealed that the investigating officer in this case was found guilty in the second criminal case registered under Section 303, PPC and he was not available to record his statement. On the basis of the request made by the applicants, the Head Constable, who was associated with the Investigation Officer, was acquainted with the handwriting and signature of the Investigating Officer, who was summoned to provide secondary evidence. The lawyer's conviction was that there was no provision in the law to call and examine a person for secondary evidence. In addition to this methodology, the Seed Head Constable, who was stationed with the Investigation Officer, was familiar with the handwriting and the Investigation Officer's signatures, was very concerned with the inclusion of secondary evidence about the operation, if the Head Constable. Already listed as a prosecution witness, there was no restriction on his re-appearance to record secondary evidence
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
