The discussion revolves around Sections 265-F and 540 of the Cr.P.C. - **Section 265-F:** Allows the court to summon any person who is likely to be acquainted with the facts of the case
فوجداری مقدمے میں گواہوں کی جانچ کے سلسلے میں ضابطہ فوجداری (Cr.P.C.) کی دفعہ 265-F اور 540 کی تشریح اور اطلاق پر تبادلہ خیال کرنا۔ اس کیس میں کیا ہو سکتا ہے اس کا ایک بیانیہ خاکہ یہ ہے:
### کیس کا جائزہ:
**واقعہ:**
- ایک واقعہ پیش آیا جس کی وجہ سے فرسٹ انفارمیشن رپورٹ (ایف آئی آر) درج کی گئی۔
**تفتیش کا مرحلہ:**
- تحقیقات کے دوران ایف آئی آر میں کچھ گواہوں کا ذکر کیا گیا تھا، لیکن سی آر پی سی کی دفعہ 161 کے تحت ان کے بیانات ریکارڈ نہیں کیے گئے تھے۔ یہ مختلف وجوہات کی وجہ سے ہو سکتا ہے جیسے گواہوں کا دستیاب نہ ہونا یا تفتیشی حکام سے رابطہ نہ کرنا۔
** آزمائشی مرحلہ:**
- جیسے ہی کیس کی سماعت ہوتی ہے، استغاثہ اپنے گواہ اور ثبوت پیش کرتا ہے۔
- دفاع پیش کیے گئے شواہد کو چیلنج کرتا ہے اور یہ دلیل دے سکتا ہے کہ اہم گواہ، جن کے بیانات تفتیش کے دوران ریکارڈ نہیں کیے گئے، کو عدالت میں گواہی دینے کی اجازت نہیں دی جانی چاہیے۔
**قانونی دلائل:**
- بحث Cr.P.C کی دفعہ 265-F اور 540 کے گرد گھومتی ہے۔
- **دفعہ 265-F:** عدالت کو کسی بھی ایسے شخص کو طلب کرنے کی اجازت دیتی ہے جو ممکنہ طور پر کیس کے حقائق سے واقف ہو، اس بات سے قطع نظر کہ اس کا بیان تفتیش کے دوران ریکارڈ کیا گیا ہو۔
- **سیکشن 540:** عدالت کو کسی بھی مادی گواہ کو طلب کرنے کا اختیار دیتی ہے، چاہے اس کا پہلے ذکر نہ کیا گیا ہو، اگر ان کا ثبوت ایک منصفانہ فیصلے کے لیے ضروری ہو۔
**عدالت کا کردار:**
- عدالت کے پاس یہ فیصلہ کرنے کا اختیار ہے کہ آیا ایسے گواہوں سے جرح کی اجازت دی جائے۔
- اس بات کو یقینی بنانا چاہیے کہ گواہوں کی جانچ میں غیر ضروری تاخیر نہ ہو اور وہ منصفانہ ٹرائل کے اصولوں کی پابندی کرے۔
** ثبوتی تحفظات:**
- عدالت ہر گواہ کی گواہی کی شہادت کی قدر کا جائزہ لیتی ہے۔
- یہ اس بات پر غور کرتا ہے کہ آیا ان گواہوں کی گواہی جن کے بیانات پہلے ریکارڈ نہیں کیے گئے تھے ملزم کے ساتھ تعصب کر سکتے ہیں۔
- حتمی مقصد ایک منصفانہ ٹرائل کو یقینی بنانا ہے جہاں استغاثہ اور دفاع دونوں کو اپنا مقدمہ پیش کرنے کے مساوی مواقع حاصل ہوں۔
### نتیجہ:
یہ بیانیہ ایک قانونی منظر نامے کا خاکہ پیش کرتا ہے جہاں گواہوں کی گواہی کی قابل قبولیت ایک فوکل پوائنٹ بن جاتی ہے، خاص طور پر جب تفتیش کے مرحلے کے دوران ان کے بیانات ریکارڈ نہیں کیے گئے تھے۔ Cr.P.C کی دفعہ 265-F اور 540 کے تحت عدالت کے فیصلے مقدمے کی سماعت کے دورانیے کا تعین کرنے اور انصاف کی منصفانہ فراہمی کو یقینی بنانے میں اہم کردار ادا کریں۔
اگر آپ کے پاس اس کیس کی مزید مخصوص تفصیلات یا پہلو ہیں جسے آپ دریافت کرنا چاہتے ہیں، تو بلا جھجھک مزید وضاحت طلب کریں۔
interpretation and application of Sections 265-F and 540 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) in relation to the examination of witnesses in a criminal trial. Here’s a narrative outline of what might be happening in the case:
### Case Overview:
**Incident:**
- An incident occurred which led to the filing of a First Information Report (FIR).
**Investigation Phase:**
- During the investigation, certain witnesses were mentioned in the FIR, but their statements were not recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. This might be due to various reasons such as the witnesses not being available or not approached by the investigating authorities.
**Trial Phase:**
- As the case proceeds to trial, the prosecution presents its witnesses and evidence.
- The defense challenges the evidence presented and may argue that crucial witnesses, whose statements were not recorded during investigation, should not be allowed to testify in court.
**Legal Arguments:**
- The discussion revolves around Sections 265-F and 540 of the Cr.P.C.
- **Section 265-F:** Allows the court to summon any person who is likely to be acquainted with the facts of the case, irrespective of whether their statement was recorded during investigation.
- **Section 540:** Empowers the court to summon any material witness, even if not mentioned earlier, if their evidence is essential for a just decision.
**Court's Role:**
- The court has the discretion to decide whether to allow such witnesses to be examined.
- It must ensure that the examination of witnesses does not cause undue delay and adheres to the principles of a fair trial.
**Evidentiary Considerations:**
- The court evaluates the evidentiary value of each witness's testimony.
- It considers whether the testimony of witnesses whose statements were not recorded earlier might prejudice the accused.
- The ultimate goal is to ensure a fair trial where both prosecution and defense have equal opportunities to present their case.
### Conclusion:
This narrative outlines a legal scenario where the admissibility of witness testimony becomes a focal point, especially when their statements were not recorded during the investigation phase. The court’s decisions under Sections 265-F and 540 of the Cr.P.C. play a crucial role in determining the course of the trial and ensuring justice is served fairly.
If you have more specific details or aspects of the case you'd like to explore, feel free to ask for further elaboration.
Judgement
2022 SCMR 1882
Witness mentioned in FIR but whose statement is not recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C.---Whether such witness could be examined under section 256-F or section 540, Cr.P.C. and his evidence relied upon---Held, that perusal of section 265-F, Cr.P.C. shows that nowhere in the said section it is mentioned that only those witnesses could be examined whose statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. have been recorded---Under section 265-F, Cr.P.C. the Trial Court is not bound to record the statements of only those witnesses who have been listed in the calendar of witnesses---Furthermore there is no bar that a witness, whose statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. had not been recorded at the time of investigation, cannot be allowed to be examined under section 540, Cr.P.C.---When a witness is examined in Court, whose statement has not been recorded at the time of investigation under section 161, Cr.P.C., the evidentiary value to be attached to the evidence of such witness has to be looked into and if it is found that prejudice has been caused to the accused then the evidence of such witness may or may not be acted upon.
To arrive at a just conclusion, the courts can call any person likely to be acquainted with the facts of the case after ascertaining it from the Public Prosecutor or the complainant, subject to general provisions that summoning of any such witness does not cause delay or defeat the ends of justice. Section 265-F(2) of Cr.P.C empowers the Courts to summon a person, after having been ascertained from the Public Prosecutor or the complainant, who is likely to be acquainted with the facts of the case, to be able to give evidence for the prosecution. Section 265-F(7), Cr.P.C grants even to the accused a right to apply for summoning any witness and production of documents. The very purpose of section 265-F, Cr.P.C is to ensure the concept of a fair trial and to achieve this purpose equal opportunity has been given to both the accused and the prosecution for summoning the evidence. It is nowhere mentioned in this section that only those witnesses could be examined whose statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. have been recorded. Under this provision of law i.e. section 265-F, Cr.P.C the Trial Court is not bound to record the statements of only those witnesses who have been listed in the calendar of witnesses. On the other hand, section 540, Cr.P.C. empowers the Trial Court to summon a material witness even if his name did not appear in the column of witnesses, provided his evidence is deemed essential for the just and proper decision of the case. Section 540 is divisible in two parts. In the first part, discretion is given to the Court and enables it at any stage of an inquiry, trial or other proceedings under the Code, (a) to summon anyone as a witness, or (b) to examine any person present in the Court, or (c) to recall and re-examine any person whose evidence had already been recorded.
On the other hand, the second part appears to be mandatory and requires the Court to take any of the steps mentioned above if the new evidence appears to be essential to the just decision of the case. The object of the provision, as a whole, is to do justice not only from the point of view of the accused and the prosecution but also justice from the point of view of the society. The Court examines evidence under this section neither to help the prosecution nor to help the accused. It is done neither to fill up any gaps in the prosecution evidence nor to give it any unfair advantage against the accused. Fundamental thing to be seen is whether the Court considers this evidence necessary in the facts and circumstances of the particular case before it. If this results in only "filling of lacuna" that is purely a subsidiary factor and cannot be taken into consideration. There is no bar that a witness, whose statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. had not been recorded at the time of investigation, cannot be allowed to be examined under section 540, Cr.P.C. When a witness is examined in Court, whose statement has not been recorded at the time of investigation under section 161, Cr.P.C., the evidentiary value to be attached to the evidence of such witness has to be looked into and if it is found that prejudice has been caused to the accused then the evidence of such witness may or may not be acted upon.
Comments
Post a Comment