1994 P Cr (PLP)
ABDUL HAMID — Petitioner Versus S.H.O., POLICE STATION, UGOKEE and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ABDUL HAMID — Petitioner Versus S.H.O., POLICE STATION, UGOKEE and 2 others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (ABDUL HAMID — Petitioner Versus S.H.O., POLICE STATION, UGOKEE and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Zafar Chaudhry for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 302/109
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Statement of prosecution witness recorded by Police
Correctness or otherwise of the statement of a prosecution witness recorded by Police during investigation could not be examined by High Court in a Constitutional petition under Art. 199 as it could be a mockery of justice
Constitutional petition being misconceived was dismissed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
S. 302/109
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Statement of prosecution witness recorded by Police
Correctness or otherwise of the statement of a prosecution witness recorded by Police during investigation could not be examined by High Court in a Constitutional petition under Art. 199 as it could be a mockery of justice
Constitutional petition being misconceived was dismissed accordingly. Muhammad Zafar Chaudhry for Petitioner. M.A. Zafar for the Complainant. A case, F.f.R. No.349/94, dated 14-7-1994 under section 324/109, P.P.C. was registered against the petitioner at Police Station Ugoki, District Sialkot for causing murderous assault on Darvesh Muhammad Anwar complainant. Later on, on the death of the complainant section 324, P.P.C. was converted into section 302, P.P.C.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the police is not recording the statement of Mian Muhammad Bashir who, according to the petitioner, is the only eye-witness in this case.
3. The S.H.O. concerned and the Investigating Officer were summoned and they have appeared with record, which shows that the statement of the aforesaid eye-witness was recorded on 14-7-1994. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the police has not recorded statement of the said P.W. correctly. I am afraid, the correctness or otherwise of a statement of the prosecution witness recorded by the police during the investigation cannot be p examined at this stage as this would be a mockery of justice. 4 The petition is misconceived and the same is dismissed N.H.Q./A-675/L Petition dismissed.