17/07/2020
QANUN-E-SHAHDAT ORDER, 1984 ON FINGER-TIPS
INTRODUCTION:
It is President’s Order No. 10 of 1984.
This Order Made by President On 30TH Muharram, 1405 (26 October, 1984).
This Order is the Reproduction Of “LAW OF EVIDENCE ACT, 1872”.
The Purpose behind Reproducing of “LAW OF EVIDENCE ACT, 1872” into “QANUN-E-SHAHADAT ORDER, 1984” Was to bring it in conformity with Injunctions Of Holy Quran and Sunnah.
It consists of 3 parts.
It consists of 13 chapters.
It Consists Of 166 Articles.
EVIDENCE: According to Article 2(c) of QSO, Evidence includes all statements which the court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses, such statements are called “Oral Evidence”. In Other way All Documents produced for the Inspection Of the Court, Such Documents are called “Documentary Evidence”.
KINDS OF EVIDENCE: Following are the Kinds Of Evidence:
ORAL EVIDENCE
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
PRIMARY EVIDENCE
SECONDARY EVIDENCE
DIRECT EVIDENCE
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE/INDIRECT EVIDENCE
REAL EVIDENCE
PERSONAL EVIDENCE
HEARSAY EVIDENCE
SUMMARY DETAILS OF QSO:
Articles 3 and 17 of QSO discuss The “QUALIFICATION, CRITERIA, COMPETENCY AND NUMBER OF WITNESSES”, required to prove any Fact-in-Issue or Relevant Facts.
Articles 4 to 14 of QSO discuss The “EXCEPTIONS, PRIVILEGES” In a Way That Persons coming under purview of these Articles are not allowed or permitted to Give Evidence or Statement with Respect to their Privileged Communications.
Article 15 of QSO discusses “PROTECTION TO WITNESS” in a Way That Witness should give all the Answers to the Questions but he can not be Arrested or prosecuted and Such Answers shall not be proved against him in any criminal proceedings.
Article 16 of QSO discusses the “ACCOMPLICE/APPROVER”, who Is commonly known as “SULTANI GAWAH” Or “WADA MAAF GAWAH” in a Way That he becomes competent witness Against principal Accused but his evidence is not applicable in Hudood cases. It is an Important Rule Of An Evidence that Evidence of an Accomplice can not be proved unless it is corroborated Under Article 129(b) of QSO.
Article 17 of QSO discusses “COMPETENCY AND NUMBER OF WITNESSES” under the ambit of “TAZKIYAH-TUL-SHAHOOD” to Ascertain whether that witness is a credible one or not.
Article 18 to 29 of QSO discuss The “FACTS-IN-ISSUE And RELEVANT FACTS”.
“Fact-in-Issue” can be called “PRINCIPAL FACTS” Or “FACTUM PROBANDIUM” which clarifies the Existence or Non-Existence of certain fact/Incident.
“Relevant Fact” can be called “EVIDENTIARY FACTS” Or “FACTUM PROBANDI” Which are so connected with “Facts-in-Issue” that they render the Principal Facts probable or improbable.
Article 19 of QSO discusses “RESGESTAE”.
Article 22 of QSO discusses The “IDENTIFICATION PARADE”, meaning thereby, the procedure in which the Identification of an Offender is done, who was a stranger, not known previously to the witness.
The Object of Identification Parade is to find out whether suspected person is the Real Offender or Not.
Article 24 of QSO discusses The “PLEA OF ALIBI”.
The word “ALIBI” is a Latin Term which Means “ELSE-WHERE”.
“PLEA OF ALIBI” Is a Plea of defense by which the Accused Suggests To the court that he was somewhere else at the time of commission of an offence.
“PLEA OF ALIBI” Is only Applicable in Criminal Cases Not in Civil cases.
Article 30 to 36 of QSO discuss The “ADMISSIONS”, Meaning thereby, A Statement Oral or Documentary by Party or Witness, which suggests Any inference As to Any Facts-in-Issue or Relevant facts.
“ADMISSION” Simply means Acknowledgment of Right Of Another upon Himself.
“ADMISSION” Is of two kinds: i. JUDICIAL ADMISSION ii. EXTRA-JUDUCIAL ADMISSION.
Articles 37 to 43 of QSO discuss The “CONFESSION” Whereas Sections 164,364,533 Of Cr.PC gives procedure for CONFESSION.
“CONFESSION” Means An Acknowledgment by Accused in Express words in criminal cases regarding charge being imposed upon him.
“CONFESSION” Is Of three kinds: i. JUDICIAL CONFESSION ii. EXTRA-JUDICIAL CONFESSION iii. RETRACTED CONFESSION.
“ADMISSION” Is Normally made in Civil Cases.
“CONFESSION” Is Normally made in Criminal Cases.
Article 46 of QSO discusses The “DYING DECLARATION”.
“DYING DECLARATION” Means A statement Made by Dying person as to cause of his death or circumstances of his death.
“DYING DECLARATION” Is Admissible in both Civil And criminal cases.
The Modes Of “DYING DECLAARTION” Are: i. WRITTEN ii. ORAL iii. SIGNALS,SIGNS,GESTURES.
Article 54 of QSO discusses The “RES-JUDICATA” Just Like Section 11 Of CPC, And Section 403 of CrPC.
Article 55 of QSO discusses The “DECLARATION” Just like section 42 of Specific relief Act. This Article 55 Applies in the Capacity of Judgment-in-Rem.
Articles 59 to 65 of QSO discuss The “OPINION OF EXPERTS/THIRD PERSONS”.
Articles 70 And 71 Of QSO discuss “ORAL EVIDENCE”, Which must be Direct Evidence, in order to make it Admissible and Trust-Worthy.
“HEARSAY EVIDENCE” Is an Exception To Articles 70 and 71 Of QSO, But though this Evidence deems to be No Evidence in the Eyes of Law.
“HEARSAY EVIDENCE” Means an Evidence Which a witness does not say of his own knowledge, but says that another said or signified to him.
Article 73 of QSO discusses The “PRIMARY EVIDENCE”, Meaning thereby that Evidence in which original documents itself produced for the inspection of the court.
Article 74 of QSO discusses The “SECONDARY EVIDENCE”, Meaning thereby that Certified True Copies Made from the Original Record.
Hand-Writing of a person can be proved under Articles 61, 78,84 of QSO.
Article 85 of QSO discusses The “PUBLIC DOCUMENTS”.
Article 86 of QSO discusses The “PRIVATE DOCUMENTS”.
Articles 90 to 101 And 129 Of QSO discuss “PRESUMPTIONS AS TO DOCUMENTS”.
“PRESUMPTION” is a Kind Of Universally Accepted principle.
Articles 111 to 113 of QSO discuss “FACTS NEED NOT TO BE PROVED”
Facts Judicially noticeable need not to be proved.
Article 114 of QSO discusses “ESTOPPEL”.
The word “ESTOPPEL” is derived from An Old French Word “ESTOUPAIL” which means to stop or to hinder.
“ESTOPPEL” Is a Rule of evidence whereby a person is prevented from denying or asserting fact contrary to his previous statement.
Rule Of “ESTOPPEL” Is based on Maxim, “Allegans contraria non est audiendus”, means a person alleging contradictory facts must not be proved.
Rule Of “ESTOPPEL” Is used in civil Law and has ano Application in criminal proceedings.
Article 117 to 127 of QSO discuss “BURDEN OF PROOF”.
The person Who claims for Remedy is under an obligation to prove Existence Of Certain facts. This obligation is called “BURDEN OF PROOF”
“BURDEN OF PROOF’ Is based on the Maxim “Incumbit probation qui dicit non qui neyate” means the “BURDEN OF PROOF” Is on the party who asserts, not on him who denies.
In Civil Cases, “BURDEN OF PROOF” lies on Plaintiff.
In Criminal cases, “BURDEN OF PROOF” lies on Prosecution.
In Criminal cases, “BURDEN OF PROOF” Shifts from Prosecution to Accused When Accused takes the plea Under Sections 96 to 106 of PPC Or Plea of Alibi Under Article 124 (1) Of QSO.
Article 128 of QSO discusses “LEGITIMACY OF CHILD”.
If child is born after six lunar months of Marriage is legitimate AS PER Article 128 of QSO.
If child is born within two years after its dissolution, the mother remained unmarried is legitimate as per Article 128 of QSO.
Article 132 of QSO discusses “MODES OF EXAMINATION OF WITNESS”.
“EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF” Means the Examination of witness by the party who calls him shall be called his Examination-In-Chief.
“CROSS-EXAMINATION” Means the Examination of a witness by the Adverse party shall be called his Cross-Examination.
“RE-EXAMINATION” Means the Examination of witness subsequent to Cross Examination by party who calls him shall be called his Re-Examination.
Article 136 of QSO discusses “LEADING QUESTIONS”.
“LEADING QUESTIONS” Are those questions which suggest the answer to the Witness in the form of YES/NO.
“LEADING QUESTIONS” Must not be asked in Examination-In-Chief, except with the permission of court, If objected by Adverse party As per Article 137 of QSO.
“LEADING QUESTIONS” Can be asked in Cross-Examination as per Article 138 of QSO.
Article 150 of QSO discusses “HOSTILE WITNESS”.
Article 151 of QSO discusses “IMPEACHING CREDIT OF WITNESS”
Article 164 of QSO discusses “EVIDENCE THROUGH MODERN DEVICES”.
Devices such as Internet, Skype, Video Link, phone calls, SMS, Video conference, VCR, CD, DVD Etc are modern devices and can be produced as an evidence as per Article 164 of QSO.
20/08/2022
19/02/2022
19/02/2022
28/01/2022
28/01/2022