UMAIR ASHRAF vs THE STATE
This criminal revision application challenged an order passed by the IVth Additional District and Sessions Judge, South, which permitted the prosecution to play a Compact Disc (CD) as evidence under Article 164 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. The applicant contended that the CD contained a confession made before the police, which lacks evidentiary value in the eyes of the law, and further argued that the CD was not provided to the accused nor included in the charge sheet. The State argued that Article 164 allows for the production of evidence derived from modern devices. The Court held that while the applicant's concerns regarding the evidentiary value of a confession made before the police could be raised during final arguments, the prosecution cannot be disallowed from producing evidence collected via modern devices at the pre-trial or evidence-production stage. Consequently, the Court dismissed the revision application, affirming that the admissibility of evidence produced through modern techniques under Article 164 is permissible, leaving the assessment of its probative value for the final adjudication of the case.
- Can evidence obtained through modern devices be disallowed at the production stage based on arguments regarding its ultimate evidentiary value?
- Does Article 164 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984 permit the production of evidence derived from modern devices?
- Can an objection regarding the evidentiary value of a confession contained in a CD be raised at the stage of producing evidence?
- Article 164, Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984
ORDER
' DR. QAMMARUDDIN BOHRA, J.---(1) Granted.
2. This criminal revision application has been filed against the order passed by the IVth Additional District and Sessions Judge South that on 2-4-2008 and after hearing DDPP for the State, advocate for the complainant and defence advocate allowed for playing CD under Article 164 of Qanun-e- Shahadat Order, 1984.
' Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the CD consisting the confession of the accused and the said CD is not provided to the accused nor it appears in the charge sheet and the same consisting upon confession of the accused before the police. Learned counsel further contended that the confession before the police has no value in the eye-of-law as such CD cannot be played.
State counsel opposes the contention and she stated that under Article 164 of Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 production of. Evidence that has become 'available because of modern device then the Court may allow to be produced such device.
' The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the CD which has been allowed to be produced in evidence is consisting of confession of the accused before the police has no evidentiary value. This contention can be raised at the time of arguments but at the moment evidence which has been collected by the prosecution by way of modern device cannot be disallowed.
' Article 164 of Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 reads as under:-- '
164. Production of evidence that has become available because of modern devices, etc.-- ' In such cases as the Court may consider appropriate; the Court may allow to be produced any evidence that may have become available because of modern devices or techniques.
' In light of the above there is no substance in the contentions of the learned counsel for the applicant as such criminal revision stands dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases
- Syed Mohsin Ali and another vs The State & another 2022 KLR Criminal Cases 232
- Syed Mohsin Ali and others vs The State and others 2022 PCRLJ 1511
- Ch. Aamir Shahzad vs Muhammad Makki and 5 others 2021 YLR 1641