Section 540 of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), Section 302/34 Qatiel Ahmed again requested the court to summon the prosecutor's witnesses in the absence of his lawyer to provide him with a defense lawyer at state expense. Neither his statement was recorded nor his signature was obtained on the order sheet when the accused was already engaged to a private lawyer, there was no chance of appointing a defense lawyer on the state expense in the order sheet on his absence. The contradiction of the date in the order sheet suggests that the trial court erred in making this error early in the trial or perhaps this order later. They were recorded, no doubt the law was needed to settle the cases as quickly as possible, but not to give any impression of injustice to any party, consequently the order was issued and the trial court ordered. As well as allowing the accused the applicant an opportunity to investigate the required evidence of the prosecution, and in the event of failure, his right to a reconciliation examination was excluded.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
