livelawpk.com - The Summoning a Witness is only warranted if their Testimony

The Summoning a Witness is only warranted if their Testimony is essential for a just Decision --- Lahore High Court, Lahore

5 days, 20 hours
42

The Summoning a Witness is only warranted if their Testimony is essential for a just Decision --- Lahore High Court, Lahore

Islamabad 27-03-2025: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by Petitioner challenging an order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Samundari, which rejected his application for summoning a prosecution witness who had been given up as a Court Witness under Section 540 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).

The case originated from FIR No. 253/2023, registered on May 13, 2023, at Police Station Saddar Samundari, District Faisalabad, under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). The complainant, accused of murdering his brother. During the trial, the prosecution presented its evidence and examined key witnesses, including the complainant and another eyewitness (PW-7). However, the prosecution gave up a witness, another cited eyewitness, as unnecessary.

The Petitioner, sought the Court’s intervention to summon prosecution witness as a Court Witness, arguing that his testimony was crucial for the fair adjudication of the case. However, the prosecution opposed this plea, contending that prosecution witness was not essential and had been given up due to suspicions of collusion with the accused. The Additional District Public Prosecutor (ADPP) further argued that the case was at an advanced stage, with the accused’s statement under Section 342 Cr.P.C. due to be recorded, and the petition was merely an attempt to delay proceedings.

After reviewing the case, Mr. Justice Farooq Haider dismissed the Criminal Revision Petition, emphasizing that it is the prerogative of the prosecution to decide which witnesses to present. The Court cited Saeed Khan Vs. The State (2008 SCMR 849) and Mazhar Ali Vs. The State (2005 SCMR 523) to support its ruling that an accused cannot compel the prosecution to produce a particular witness. The Court further observed that if the accused considered the witness important, he could call him in his defense instead.

The judgment reaffirmed that under Section 540 Cr.P.C., a trial Court can summon a witness only if their testimony is essential for the just decision of the case. Since two other eyewitnesses had already testified and the ocular account was sufficiently established, summoning prosecution witness was deemed unnecessary. The Lahore High Court ruled that the trial Court had acted within legal principles, and there was no miscarriage of justice in its decision.

Key Takeaways:

The prosecution has the right to decide which witnesses to produce, and the accused cannot force their summoning as prosecution witnesses.
The accused can call any omitted witness in their defense if they believe their testimony is crucial.
The power to summon witnesses rests with the Court, but it must be exercised only when the testimony is essential for a just decision.
The ruling aligns with settled principles of law that prevent unwarranted delays in criminal trials.

With this decision, the Lahore High Court has reinforced the boundaries of judicial discretion in witness summoning, preventing unnecessary extensions in criminal proceedings. The trial in the Samundari murder case will now proceed without further interruption, with the accused retaining the right to present a defense witness if desired.