The Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, Latest Law Cases. Contention of husband that wife, while making claim for dowry articles, was required to prove the case in terms of the requirements of Qanun-Shahadat Order, was not only misconceived but was also besides the mandate of law as envisaged in S. Evidence--Ocular testimony--Value of--Ocular testimony could not be thrown out merely because there was background of enmity with the convict--However test for accepting the same is that there are establishing circumstances regarding their presence at place of occurrence at the relevant time and whether they could have witnessed the occurrence and that they were in a position to identify the culprits and that the number of culprits described by them could be accepted as dependable. Competency of a witness.
|Published (Last):||22 September 2018|
|PDF File Size:||14.85 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||20.76 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, Latest Law Cases. Contention of husband that wife, while making claim for dowry articles, was required to prove the case in terms of the requirements of Qanun-Shahadat Order, was not only misconceived but was also besides the mandate of law as envisaged in S.
Evidence--Ocular testimony--Value of--Ocular testimony could not be thrown out merely because there was background of enmity with the convict--However test for accepting the same is that there are establishing circumstances regarding their presence at place of occurrence at the relevant time and whether they could have witnessed the occurrence and that they were in a position to identify the culprits and that the number of culprits described by them could be accepted as dependable.
Competency of a witness. Family Matters. Industrial Relations. Modes of proof of f. Newspaper reporting. Rent Procedings. P L D Kar. It applies to all judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings. P L D Karachi Competency of a witness: -- All persons, no matter they are relatives or not, are competent to give evidence if-. Other than the physical ability pertains to moral qualities of a witness. It requires a witness to give evidence which should always be free from fear, favour, hatred, bias, love, lust, affection and enmity.
Regarding this condition of competency third proviso to Article 3 of the Order makes it imperative for the Court to determine the competence of a witness in accordance with the qualification. In case such witness is not forthcoming, the Court may take the evidence of witness who may be available. Although it was mentioned in the 3rd proviso to Article 3 of the Order that the Court shall determine the competence of a witness in accordance.
Moreover, starvation of real scholars in the present age has increased the number of compilers who presented their books or booklet in accordance to, the views of any specific Imam.
Such kind of compilation has done no service to humanity but has only strengthened sectarianism. So far as the Courts are concerned they are not supposed to follow any specific Imam, spiritual leader or religious sect, even in spite of their deep attachment with them. Judges belong to an elite of erudites who are expected to work as thinkers and in capacity of Judges of an Islamic State they are bound to judge which view of the Muslim scholars is closest to universalism because Islamic principles of justice are universal in their nature and sectarianism or parochialism do not have any scope in it.
They are also expected to possess faculties of cogitation to harmonize conflicting views of scholars with the help of juristic deductions including Qisas. Moreover, justice is not the fief of any nation, thereof, piety also cannot be the fief of any class of believers or athiests. Real Justice can only be done when witnesses give evidence based on truth. If the evidence of a witness reflects enmity, bias, love, lust ac.
If the evidence of such person created some doubt in the minds of Common person about partiality or favouritism, then the same may not be treated admissible unless corroborated by other pieces of evidence. The provisions. The intention of the Legislature, is that the Court has to regulate its proceedings through a special procedure laid down by the Act itself which makes the procedure easier and gives more room to the parties to settle their disputes amicably and the Courts cannot remain silent spectator, tied down by the technicalities of law and watch the deterioration of administration of justice.
C Where a matter or situation is not governed by express provision of the law or the rules framed thereunder, the Family Court is free to evolve its own procedure and pass any suitable order for expeditious and just decision of the case. Oral evidence has to be of those who have themselves witnessed facts inclusive of events, state of things and condition of mind etc.
If such were capable of being seen, heard them if susceptible to hearing or perceived them otherwise if the facts could be so perceived through the senses or have subscribed to or participated in relation to.
The same. Hearsay is not evidence. Documents are to be proved through their authors or scribes or witnesses in whose presence such ware written or signed or as are acquainted with the writing or signatures of the author or through expert evidence or by comparison of signatures or upon admission etc.
Therefore, production of documents through authors or scribes, albeit being the best, was oniy one of the methods of proof though it was always expected that best evidence in a case would be produced, failure giving rise, where relevant, to adverse inferences. At the same time, objections as to admissibility of documents were to be raised at the earliest and usually at the time such were exhibited and admitted m evidence. Failure to timely object of at the earliest opportunity, therefore, may foreclose such objections at a later stage of the proceedings.
The rule is based on common sense and good policy. A prompt objection puts the adversary on due notice and would not result in denial of opportunity to the opposite number to satisfy the requirements of proof. A document admitted in evidence without objection and exhibited in terms of Order XIII, rule 4 is a proved document and its admissibility cannot, except for good reason, be questioned at a later stags.
However, objection to admissibility of a document even though not expressly take would not necessarily constitute admission either in totality or as to contents. Juice an objection may be inherent in a situation where relevant facts had been denied in the pleadings and were in issue or authorship not being disputed contents alone is questioned. Similar is the position of contents of a telegram which per se are not evidence of the facts stated therein. There is a distinction also between proof of a document, upon its being exhibited and its authorship.
Likewise, merely because a document has been admitted in evidence and exhibited such fact alone, whereupon the record source of the document is disputed, would not constitute proof of its execution by the purported executant. Thus it can safely be concluded that a document, on being exhibited without contest, was a proved document, for all purposes but that was so only when authorship was not in question in the case or was impliedly or expressly proved and the contents, not otherwise in dispute, prove themselves e.
At the same time, proof of a document was not the equivalent of its relevancy; the two were independent concepts. Likewise, admissibility of a document in evidence was not synonymous with its evidential value or vice versa. It is on the basis of the foregoing formulations that the documentary evidence in the suit is to be assessed.
Where correspondence had been admitted in evidence without objection from the defendants no question at any time was raised about such correspondence not it having been exchanged nor did the defendants deny their signatures on such exhibits as purported to bear them.
Original and exhibited letters from the defendants were thus proved documents. Correspondingly, many of these letters referred and were even in response to the exhibited copies of the correspondence emanating from the plaintiffs. Such copies also had been exhibited without objection. In this state of the record, it must be found that the relevant exhibits in the correspondence were proved to have been authored by those who purported to have signed them and besides bare recitals in such correspondence, as distinguished from veracity thereof, also stand proved.
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. Pakistan PLD Lah. Secretary of State 34 IA ; L. Suraj Bhan v. Asian Assurance Co. AIR Bom. State AIR Cal. Central Insurance Co. Limited PLD Kar. Mehari v. Newspaper reporting: -- Newspaper reporting devoid of personal knowledge of a reporter on the basis of information received by him will be a mere hearsay and is inadmissible in evidence.
Sarup Singh v. Emperor 26 Cr. 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 reference to Hudood , addition of Article 44 and addition of a proviso to Article 42 if ,compared with corresponding sections of the repealed Act.
PART I. Short title, extent and commencement :- 1 This Order may be called the Qanun-e-Shahadat, Provisions of Qanun-e-Shahadat apply to proceedings before any Court, Court martial, a Tribunal or other authority exercising judicial or quasi-judicial powers.
Qanun-e-Shahadat, however, does not apply to proceedings before an arbitrator. XIX, Rr. Qanun-e-Shahadat, Such affidavit did not possess any such attribute to warrant conclusion that re-counting was necessary.
P L D Scope : -- Section 70 of the Trade Marks Act, provides that the Registrar shall have all powers of a Civil Court for the purposes of receiving evidence, administering oaths and forcing attendance of witnesses, compelling discovery and production of documents and issuing commission for examination of witnesses and that the evidence would be given by affidavits.
The Registrar is further authorised to take oral evidence in lieu of affidavit or in addition to such evidence by further affidavit. Neither any provision as to the conduct of a hearing has been prescribed in the Revised Trade Marks Rules, , nor any procedure which is to be adopted either by the Registrar or by the Tribunal for hearing of retification application.
However, section 70 b of Act, , provides that the evidence shall be given by affidavits. Filing of counter affidavit by the respondent, at the most can be treated at par with the written statement. Before treating any affidavit as a piece of evidence, it is the requirement of law that a party should be made aware that such affidavit Was their full and final evidence.
Interpretation :- 1 In this Order, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context, Words printed, lithographed or photographed are documents;. An inscription on a metal plate or stone is a document;. Whenever, under the provisions of the law for the time being in force relating to civil procedure, any Court records on issue of fact, the fact to be asserted or denied in the answer to such issue is a fact in issue.
At his trial the following facts may be in issue Facts alleged by prosecution are to be proved by evidence on oath in Court. Evidence provides a basis for proof of such facts which consequently result in conviction of accused. Evidence, Agreement to sell. Plaintiff is to succeed on the basis of his own evidence and not on the basis of weakness of the evidence of the defence.
Civil matter is to be decided on the basis of preponderance of evidence and the Court is to consider the entire evidence on record, whether it is of the plaintiff or of both plaintiff and defendant, in order to arrive at correct conclusion. Once the evidence is brought on record, the question of burden of proof loses its significance.
Dying declaration. Dying declaration having not been subjected to cross-examination, needed to be scrutinized closely and could be accepted only if it received satisfactory corroboration from the physical circumstances of the case. Standard of proof in civil cases. Rules of evidence for civil and criminal cases, are, in general, identical but some provisions in Qanun-e-Shahadat are peculiar to criminal cases while others are peculiar to civil cases.
In civil cases all that was necessary to insist upon was that proof adduced in support of a fact was such that should make a prudent man to act upon the supposition that it in fact existed.
Today is #GivingTuesday, help us reclaim the rights of women & girls.
Such evidence has been described to include material objects produced before the court for inspection. This inspection generally takes place inside the courtroom, however, it may be necessitated outside the court as well when, due to the bulk and volume of evidence, it is not feasible or convenient for the objects to be produced before the court. In other cases, inspection of objects may be necessary in close context to their surroundings. No exhaustive description can be given as to what physical evidence includes. The following enumeration contains its common instances:. The function of the definition is to give certainty and precision to the phrase which has been defined and to avoid repetition. However, in law, like in every other discipline, there are problems with definitions and legal interpretation of words.
The Qanun e Shahadat Order, 1984 (Law of Evidence)
Definition of “Evidence” Under Article 2 of Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984