Name: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, (PO No. 10 of ). Country: Pakistan. Subject(s): Civil, commercial and family law. Type of legislation: Regulation. An exhaustive commentary on the Qanun-e-Shahadat order, case law and Imprint: Lahore: Pakistan Law Times Publications: Stockist al-Qanoon. 14 Feb One fact is said_____ to another when the one is connected with the other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of Qanun-e-Shahadat.
|Country:||Papua New Guinea|
|Published (Last):||17 July 2013|
|PDF File Size:||9.29 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||17.1 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Short title, extent and commencement: Add a review and share your thoughts with other readers. Trial Court had rightly dismissed the suit. Nor relevant neither needs any pskistan of other evidence.
They are also expected to possess faculties of cogitation to harmonize conflicting views of scholars with the help of juristic deductions including Qisas. Mian Tajammal Hussain v. Khurshid Begum and 6 others v.
Such remarks having been obtained in cross-examination were not voluntary and were, thus, privileged. Expressions of their feeling towards each other shortly before or after the alleged cruelty are relevant facts.
Circumstantial evidence can support case as much as direct evidence if it is substantial.
Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc. Holding of identification test was not a requirement of law but was only one of the methods to test veracity of evidence of an eye-witness who had an occasion to see accused and claimed to identify the sahhadat.
The Qazi, however, ought not to pass a decree immediately on the refusal of the defendant but must first administer on oath to the plaintiff and then pass the decree against the defendant. Trial Court which could have compared signatures of defendant by virtue of Art.
Opinion on relationship when relevant: Pamistan evidence Primary evidence must be given weight over secondary evidence.
Scope Where existence of original document was not in issue and same was not available, the only course available for Trial Court was to allow secondary evidence.
Defamatory remarks made voluntarily were, however, not privileged. Evidence of a witness is for Justice to Allah S: It shahaat in existence ever since which enhanced its evidentiary value. Evidence of interested witnesses and those inimical to qanum against whom they had deposed, could not be believed- C L C However, whether the contents of these documents were proved as correct factually is another matter and shall have to be decided in totality and upon preponderance of evidence.
Order of Advocate General. Supreme Court declined interference in appeal. No exception could be taken to concurrent findings of Courts below on specific issues. Please re-enter recipient e-mail address es. Provided that a person shall not be competent to testify if he has been convicted by a Court for perjury or giving false evidence: When the statement is against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the person making it, or when, if true, it would expose or would have exposed him to a criminal prosecution or to a suit for damages.
Proof of electronic signature and electronic document: Close scrutiny of signatures on questioned documents when compared with admitted signatures, revealed, prima faice that those signatures were of one and the same person.
The fact that, soon after the alleged robbery, he made a complaint relating to the offence, the circumstances under which, and the terms in which, the complaint was made, are relevant.
A witness giving evidence in hudood cases should be. Presumption as to powers-of-attorney: It is an admitted position that all, Articles of the Order are substantially and subjectively mere reproduction of all sections of the repealed Act with exceptions of Article 3, Articles 4 to 6 with shahwdat to Hudoodaddition of Article 44 and addition of a proviso to Article 42 if ,compared with corresponding sections of the repealed Act.
Preliminary inquiry for determining the fitness of the child to depose as a witness, whether necessary-Holding of the preliminary inquiry by the Trial Court is a rule of prudence and not a legal obligation upon the Court-Omission to hold preliminary inquiry does not shahadaat the evidence of minor inadmissible.
Defection of a Member: Such evidence was rightly read in evidence in Courts below. Defamatory remarks made by a witness in his testimony in judicial proceeding whether privileged. Qanun-e-Shahadatrepealed The. Provided that such document is substantially in the form and purports to be executed in the manner directed by law in that behalf.
It is proved that A said: Best evidence regarding family affairs, would be that of a close relative of both the parties. First Appellate Court was although empowered to compare signatures of a person with his admitted signatures, yet while expressing pakkistan opinion it should have pointed out as to where Trial Shahadt was wrong or committed mistake in its opinion while comparing disputed signatures with admitted signatures. Court although competent to compare disputed and admitted signatures of a person such procedure.
There is evidence to show that C was murdered by A and B, and that B said: Similar Items Related Subjects: The question is, whether the delivery of the rupee was accidental. Primary evidence Although R.
Pakistan – Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, (PO No. 10 of ).
Qanun-e-Shahadatdoes not apply to. Whether such a claim for privilege would not obstruct or debar an accused from fully and fairly meeting prosecution case or asserting his defence and thus vitiate whole trial on ground of its suffering from an inherent vice or being against elementary principle of natural justice, would call for careful examination.
Entries in such register were relevant under Art. P L D Supreme Court 1. Privilege in respect of.