MLD 1989

1989 PLP 739 (MLD)

MUHAMMAD ARSHAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Revision No. 11 of 1989, decided on 19th February, 1989.
Honorable Judges
Riaz Ahmad, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 PLP 739 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Riaz Ahmad, J
Parties MUHAMMAD ARSHAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 739 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 739 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Riaz Ahmad, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 739 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD ARSHAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑

Representation

  • Ch. Ghulanm Bari Saleemi for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑S. 162‑‑Statements recorded by police of witnesses examined during investigation‑‑Copies of such statements not supplied to accused‑‑Accused held, had right to obtain copies of statements recorded by police during investigationTrial Court directed to supply copies of all statements to accused. Irfan Qadir, AA.‑G. assisted by Shafiquz Zaman for the State.

Judgment & Decree

‑‑‑S. 162‑‑Statements recorded by police of witnesses examined during investigation‑‑Copies of such statements not supplied to accused‑‑Accused held, had right to obtain copies of statements recorded by police during investigationTrial Court directed to supply copies of all statements to accused. Ch. Ghulanm Bari Saleemi for Petitioner. Irfan Qadir, AA.‑G. assisted by Shafiquz Zaman for the State. In this case, besides the prosecution witnesses, the statements of other persons were also recorded. Precisely, the grievance of the petitioner is that during the trial, they have not been supplied the copies of all the statements of all the persons who were examined by the S.H.O., Police Station, Pattoki and the D.S.P., Model Town, Mr. Muhammad Aslam Sahi.

2. The petitioner moved the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur, for obtaining the copies of the aforesaid statements but the application was dismissed with the observations that copies have already been delivered. It is contended that no such copies have been delivered to the petitioner.

3. Mr. Irfan Qadir, the learned Assistant Advocate‑General, has frankly conceded that it is the right of the petitioner to obtain copies of such statements and if the same have not been delivered to him, they should be supplied. In this A view of the matter, I would direct the trial Court concerned to supply all the copies of all the statements. SA./M‑1149/LPetition accepted.