Thursday, April 30, 2020

2020 YLR 619 The object behind granting a right of cross-examination can only be achieved after affording a fair opportunity to an opposite party, likely to be adversely affected, being on the receiving end in the shape of examination-in-chief from statement so recorded by the court, in all the matters

2020 YLR 619

The  object  behind  granting  a  right  of  cross-examination  can  only  be achieved  after  affording  a  fair  opportunity  to  an  opposite  party,    likely to  be  adversely  affected,  being  on  the  receiving  end  in  the  shape  of examination-in-chief  from  statement  so  recorded  by  the  court,  in  all  the matters.  To  adjudge  the  veracity,  credibility  and  trustworthiness/ truthfulness  of  the  witness  enables   the  court,  for  relying  upon,  while deciding  the  matter  before  it.  The  grant  of  a  fair  opportunity  for  cross examining  a  witness  by  the  adversary  has  its  genesis  and  roots  in  the principle  of  audi  alterm  partem  ,  duly  codified  in  the  shape  of  Art.10-A of  our  Constitution.  Under  the  law,  unless  and  until,  the  accused  is offered/granted  right  of  cross  examination  over  a  witness  who  has deposed  against  him,  such  a  statement  will  have  no  evidentiary  value and  as  such  shall  be  inadmissible  for  acting  upon  it  or  for  drawing  any inference  therefrom  against  the  adversary  party. There  are  certain  exceptions    where  examination-in-chief   recorded  by  the  court  can  be  read  against  accused  which  have  been enumerated  in  Section  512,  Cr.P.C.,  and  Articles  46  of  the  Qanun-e-Shahadat  Order,  1984,  and  evidence  of  a  witness  under  the  aforesaid provision  being    preserved  can  be  relied  upon  only.
---‐------------------------‐-------------------------------------
It  is  established  principle  of  law  that  the recovery  is  deemed  to  be  a  corroborative  piece of  evidence    to  the  direct evidence  and  as  per  dictates  of  justice  whenever  direct  evidence  is disbelieved  it  would  not  be  safe  to  maintain  conviction  on  confirmatory evidence.

No comments:

Post a Comment

WHY YOU ANGRY