Duty of prosecution -

It is the duty of prosecution to produce all the documents at the very early stage of the trial so that accused who is favourite child of the law should not be given a surprise. Application for production of document by. prosecution at the very fag end of the trial would prejudice defence as accused would not be in a better position to cross-examine prosecution witnesses. Trial Court would wrongly allow production of, document by prosecution at the fag end of trial while ASJ would rightly accept accused's revision petition by setting aside order of Trial Court. High Court upholding revisional order of ASJ & dismissing application filed by complainant u/s 561A. [(NLR) 2013-CrLJ-242]

Circumstantial evidence:

Chain of events. Missing link; benefit of. Principle. Every circumstance should be linked with each other & it should form such continuous chain that its one end touches dead body & the other neck of accused. If any link of chain is missing then its benefit must go to accused. (Lahore) [2013-YLR-2748]

Discretion - Exercise of discretion - Scope:

Discretionary powers had to be exercised judicially & in a reasonable manner. Authorities could not be allowed to exercise discretion at their whims, sweet will or in an arbitrary manner, rather they were bound to act fairly & justly. (Lahore) [2013-YLR-2846]

Law enforcement agencies -

{1} Law enforcement agencies should respect law & rights guaranteed to citizen under the Constitution. (Sindh) [2013-YLR-2814]

Motive:

Motive was a double, edged weapon. If motive could be a weapon for commission of the offence, same could be a good ground for false implication of accused in the case. In absence of other convincing & reliable evidence, accused could not be convicted merely on the basis of motive evidence furnished by prosecution. (Lahore) [2013-YLR-2789]

Power of Court to examine the accused - Scope:

S-342. Use of the word "shall" in S-342(1), CrPC indicated that examination of accused was mandatory & not discretionary. [2013-YLR-(Sindh)-2734]

Quashing of FIR - S.561-A.

Quashing of FIR - No bar imposed on filing application u/s 561-A, CrPC seeking quashing of FIR. & proceedings emanating there from at any stage, provided aggrieved party was able to demonstrate by furnishing sufficient material that entire proceedings were false, frivolous, vexatious & had been initiated to abuse process of law & if such proceedings were not quashed, gross injustice, harm and' injury might be caused to accused persons nominated therein. (Sindh) [2013-YLR-2716]

Witness - Credibility of witness - Scope:

To disbelieve a witness, it was not necessary that there should be numerous infirmities, if there was one which would impeach the credibility of the witness, that could make the entire statement doubtful. (Peshawar) [2013-YLR-2772]

Improvements made by eye-witness - Effect:

Improvements made by eye-witness in order to strengthen the prosecution case would lose, its credibility & evidentiary value. When a witness would make contradictory statement, or improvement, changing his version in order to bring in line his testimony, with the prosecution story, if found to be deliberate & dishonest, would cause serious doubt on his veracity. (Peshawar) [2013-YLR-2772]

Non-production of most natural & material witness of the occurrence - Effect:

Non-production of most natural & material witness of occurrence, would strongly lead to an inference of prosecutorial misconduct, which would not only be considered a source of undue advantage for prosecution, but also art act of suppression of material facts causing prejudice to accused. Act of withholding of most natural & a material witness of occurrence, would create an impression that, had such witness been brought into witness box, he might not have supported the prosecution; & that the prosecution in such eventually must not be in a position to avoid consequences. (Peshawar) [2013-YLR-2772]