FAQIR MUHAMMAD, SUB-INSPECTOR POLICE versus THE STATE THROUGH POLICE STATION ASTORE
The scope of the section 193 fraud case was the investigating officer of the criminal case and an FIR was registered under section 193 PPC for recording a false statement of a witness during the investigation. Taking it at trial or at the inquiry stage would be a violation of the law. Neither of the accused made any false statement on the oath before the law in any court, nor did it deny its earlier statement because an Investigation Officer had only recorded the witness's statement under section 161. , Mere recording of the statement made by the CRPC and the witnesses cannot in any way prove a crime punishable under section 193, PPC, nor can it be concluded by the end of the trial against any person. Earlier, it was the law's plan to prosecute the prosecution. Even before it began and the case was under investigation, the Chief Court should have set aside Investigations before taking action or giving its findings before the Navigation and Trial Chief Court did not appreciate the proper provision of the relevant law. And it had already decided that the guilty plea of the Chief Court was set aside and the FIR against the accused was dismissed.
Related judgments — Supreme Appelate Court Gilgit, 2010
