Producing of document in statement of Counsel ---Legality---
--‐-------------------------------
Producing of document in statement of counsel---Disputed document s could not be tendered in evidence in statement of the counsel for a party, because such procedure deprived the opposing party to test the authenticity of those document s by exercising his right of cross-examination.
Mst. AKHTAR SULTANA vs Major Retd. MUZAFFAR KHAN MALIK
PLD 2021 SC 715
Document ary evidence---Exhibited through statement of counsel----Legality---Right of cross-examination, non-availability of---Effect---Concept that document s cannot be admitted into evidence solely through statement of counsel during evidence is rooted in fundamental right to cross-examination, which is an essential aspect of adversarial legal system---Right to cross-examination allows opposing party to challenge veracity, authenticity and relevance of evidence presented, including document s---Admitting document s solely on the statements of counsel, compromises right of other party to cross-examine, which is not warranted by law---Trial Courts must ensure that all document ary (naeem)evidence is subject to scrutiny of cross-examination to uphold principles of fairness and due process---document s exhibited solely through statements of counsel without opportunity for cross-examination do not meet legal standards for admissibility of evidence---This ensures the integrity of judicial process and the rights of parties involved.
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, ISLAMABAD vs MUHAMMAD AFZAL BHATTI
2024 CLC 1246
Documentary evidence---Proof---Producing document s in statement of advocate---Effect---document s relied upon should be produced in evidence by party in its own statement so that adverse party may have a fair opportunity to cross-examine authenticity or veracity of such document s---document s produced in statement of counsel of party lack intrinsic value and they can validly be excluded from being taken into consideration.
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through District Collector, Jhang vs ALLAH BAKHSH
2024 CLC 1193
Documentary evidence--- Proof---Only one document was exhibited by petitioner in his statement, whereas the remaining documents(naeem) were exhibited/marked through the statements of Counsel for the parties and not through the testimonies of either witnesses of petitioner or respondent---Mere marking of a document as an exhibit would not dispense with requirement of proving the same and the same could not be exhibited unless it was proved---Documents not brought on the record through witnesses' testimonies could not be taken into consideration by the Court---
MUHAMMAD ASLAM vs MUHAMMAD ISMAIL2024 YLR 1199
Producing documents in statement of advocate---Effect---Documents relied upon should be produced in evidence by party in its own statement so that adverse party may have a fair opportunity to cross-examine authenticity or veracity of such documents---Documents produced in statement of Counsel of party lack intrinsic value and they can validly be excluded from being taken into consideration.
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through District Collector, Jhang vs ALLAH BAKHSH
2024 CLC 1193
Producing of document in statement of Counsel ---Legality---In the present case the relevant Jamabandi, copy of khasra gurdawari, copy of application as well as impugned gift mutation were produced in the statement of Counsel for the beneficiaries/ respondents, as such the same was considered as an invalid mode of tendering documents in evidence---Documents relied upon or on the basis of which the case has been filed should be produced in the evidence by party itself giving a fair opportunity to the other (naeem) party to cross-examine the same---As such the documents produced by the respondents' Counsel could not be relied upon as valid evidence and such documents could not be taken into consideration---Revision petition was allowed and suit for declaration filed by the petitioner-lady was decreed.
Mst. RASOOLAN BIBI vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB2023 CLC 1171
Production and exhibiting of documents---Scope---Compensation, determination of---Record revealed that the documentary evidence of the appellants had been produced in trial proceedings by their Counsel in his statement, which was not a valid tendering of the documents---Law required that the documents (naeem)relied upon or on basis of which the case had been filed, should be produced in the evidence by party itself and fair opportunity should be given to the opposite party to cross-examine the same---In the present case the documents produced by the appellants' Counsel could not be relied upon as valid piece of evidence and ordinarily such documents were excluded from being taken into consideration---
0 Comments