Find a Lawyer

BUSHRA BIBI versus MUHAMMAD RIAZ

Section 540 and 439 Panel Code (XLV of 1860), section 302/324/148/149 seeking summoning of witnesses before the applicant seeking a police witness as a prosecution witness under section 555 of other co-accused The request filed by us was eventually removed. Following the trial, the applicant moved another petition before the trial court with the same application, which was also dismissed. The trial court has been empowered to hear a witness either on his own or with a party's request, but the court was responsible for whether the witness should be summoned for a fair result / decision. The witness should be summoned. , Did not initially investigate the matter, in the original report submitted by the police, the name of the witness mentioned could not be found in the record, revealing that the witness was subsequently assigned an investigation for further investigation. He did not recommend the matter for submission of a supplementary invoice, but after the trial court dismissed the earlier application on the same subject, the accused succeeded in submitting the supplementary challan by the applicant. Did not reveal the real reason. As a court witness, the aforesaid witness failed to prove that the recording of the statement of the witness was necessary for the mere decision of this case. The Syed police officer could not be summoned as a judicial witness only on the basis that in the sub-challan, which, prime fax, was added after two years, he said that the police officer was included in the witnesses' calendar. The witness was named, in addition, he said that the witness only requested online advocate from Leepa lawyer