Find a Lawyer

HAKIM TEXTILE MILLS versus PAKISTAN

The prosecution's witnesses, examined by the court, sought cross-examination by the accused presiding officer who examined the prosecution's witnesses, summoning the prosecution witnesses sections 356, 357 and 537 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CRPC). He was killed, the matter was handed over to another Presiding Officer. Who called for prosecution witnesses to record their statements and for the purpose of examining them because the Urdu records related to the prosecution witnesses' investigation and re-examination did not have the signature of the presiding officer, English The record clearly shows that the statements of all the prosecution witnesses were signed by the deceased presiding officer, but somehow, he could not sign the cross examination of three of the four witnesses and the statement of the fourth one in the Urdu record Should not be signed. The Designated Presiding Officer acknowledges that it complied with the provisions of Sections 356 and 357. Removal of the CCP Prosecution's statements and the signing of Urdu records in signing it was an irregularity that was curable under 7 537, the PC has been alleged to have already cross-examined. Has got the opportunity, so there was no prejudice because the Urdu record of cross examination was not withdrawn. The Presiding Officer was not prosecuted again for seeking prosecution witnesses for the purpose of cross-examination. when you need a advocate from Depal Pur lawyer