MUNAWAR HUSSAIN vs THE STATE and 3 others
The petitioner, who is the complainant in a criminal case arising from F.I.R. No. 354 of 2002, challenged orders passed by the lower courts rejecting an objection regarding the erroneous recording of witness statements by the trial court's Reader, who allegedly noted an accused was armed with a 'Soti' instead of a 'Toki'. The core legal question concerned the correction of recorded evidence and the procedure for addressing discrepancies in witness depositions during trial. The Lahore High Court disposed of the petition after the petitioner's counsel stated that the grievance would be redressed if permitted to file an application before the trial court for the re-examination of the concerned prosecution witnesses. The court held that upon filing such an application, the trial court shall decide the matter on merits after hearing the parties, laying down the principle that procedural grievances regarding recorded evidence may be addressed through proper application for re-examination before the trial court.
- Can a complainant seek the re-examination of prosecution witnesses to rectify alleged errors in the recording of their statements?
- How should a trial court handle an application for the re-examination of witnesses regarding discrepancies in recorded evidence?
ORDER
1. ' MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM-UZ-ZAMAN, J.--- The petitioner is a complainant of case F.I.R. No,354 of 2002, dated 17-8-2002 registered at Police Station Saddar, Renala Khurd. Secondly, during the trial when the statements of the prosecution witnesses namely Munawar Hussain P.W.1 and Ghulam Muhammad P.W.2 were recorded, the Reader of the trial Court who was recording the evidence had wrongly brought on the record that at the time of occurrence Amjad accused was armed with "Soti" whereas the said witnesses had specifically stated that at the relevant time accused was armed with a "Toki". The objection raised by learned counsel for the petitioner was turned down by the trial Court vide order dated 30-3-2005 and the revision against the said order also met the same fate. Through this petition the legality of the said orders have been challenged.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the case at some length submits that grievance of the petitioner will be redressed if he is allowed to move application before the trial Court for re- examination of both the said witnesses. In the light of statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner this application for re-examination of both the said witnesses is filed before trial Court shall decide the same on merits after hearing both witnesses.