چشم دید،واقعیاتی،دستاویزای, تائیدی شہادت میں کیا فرق ہے اور ان کی قانونی حیثیت واہمیت کیا ہے عدالت میں شہادت/گواہی کے موضوع پر انتہائی عالمانہ فیصلہ

 2023 PCrLJ 1156

چشم دید،واقعیاتی،دستاویزای, تائیدی شہادت میں کیا فرق ہے اور ان کی قانونی حیثیت واہمیت کیا ہے

Classification of Evidence---

Any given item of judicial evidence may attract more than one of the labels by which varieties of evidence have been classified -- Principal labels are

( i ) Testimony ,.

( ii ) Hearsay evidence

( iii ) Documentary evidence ,

( iv ) Real evidence and

( v ) Circumstantial evidence

Testimony means direct evidence ; hearsay , an indirect evidence ; documentary evidence means presentation of facts through documents ; real evidence includes material things ( like case property ) --- In addition to material objects , real evidence also includes documents , physical appearance of persons and animals , demeanour of witnesses , intonation of voices on a tape recording , views , inspections out of courts of locus in quo or of some object which it is impossible or highly inconvenient to bring to court , and , possibly , out - of - court demonstrations or re - enactments of acts or events into which Court is inquiring --- Circumstantial evidence means evidence of relevant facts like motive , plans and preparatory acts , capacity , opportunity , identity , continuance , failure to give evidence , failure to provide evidence and standards of comparison.

2023 PCrLJ 1156

#قانون شہادت کے مطابق شہادت قابل ادخال سماعت کب تصور کیا جاتا ہے،جرم کے واقعات کے ساتھ مطابقت کیسے رکھی جاتی ہے

Relevancy and admissibility --- Scope- Though by judicial reasoning relevant evidence is usually admissible but there are certain restrictions on admissibility depending upon exclusionary rules of evidence -- Such artificial restrictions on the process of judicial reasoning known as rules of evidence are not uniform in the policy they seek to implement-- Rules of evidence are all attributable to policy considerations and have nothing to do with their value or links in rational chain of reasoning which restrict , rather than promote information --- Unlike relevance , potentially useful admissibility has nothing to do with probative or logical relationship involves exclusively a determination of whether law of evidence between evidence tendered and effect to be proved --- Admissibility permits relevant evidence of a particular kind to be received by the court --- Some evidence , such as hearsay , is excluded , even though relevant , because of danger of unreliability inherent in repeated statements and because it cannot be cross-examined effectively ... Confession of accused though relevant yet if recorded while in police custody is not admissible because of the reason it can be procured due to threat , duress or coercion thus regarded as unreliable --- Some evidence such as evidence of previous bad character of accused in a criminal case is excluded , even though relevant , because of considerations of fairness to the accused and danger of prejudice flowing from judge's becoming aware of his records .

2023 PCrLJ 1156

عدالت میں شہادت/گواہی کے موضوع پر انتہائی عالمانہ فیصلہ

Permission to bring on record the relevant evidence is controlled by exclusionary rules as discussed above, therefore, court while admitting evidence must refer gist of evidence or question to be asked, objection if any, reply thereto, and decision thereon before it is made part and parcel of judicial record. Where a judge after attending the provisions of QSO, 1984 and precedents on the subject is in doubt as to the admissibility of a particular piece of evidence he should declare it in favour of admissibility rather than inadmissibility because its value would later be determined by court of appeal as per Article 162 of QSO, 1984.

The evidence by which facts may be proved or disproved in a court is known as judicial evidence. Judicial evidence takes only three forms, namely

(i) oral evidence,

(ii) documentary evidence and (iii) things.

Judicial evidence, however, is open to classification not only in terms of the form in which it may be presented in court but also in terms of its substantive content, the purpose for which it is presented and the rules by which its admissibility is determined. Thus, any given item of judicial evidence may attract more than one of the labels by which the varieties of evidence have been classified.

The principal labels are

(i) Testimony,

(ii) Hearsay Evidence,

(iii) Documentary Evidence,

(iv) Real Evidence and

(v) Circumstantial Evidence. Testimony means direct evidence; hearsay, an indirect evidence; documentary evidence means presentation of facts through documents; real evidence includes material things (like case property); in addition to material objects, including documents, items of real evidence also include the physical appearance of persons and animals, the demeanour of witnesses, the intonation of voices on a tape recording, views, that is inspections out of courts of the locus in quo or of some object which it is impossible or highly inconvenient to bring to court, and, possibly, out-of-court demonstrations or re-enactments of acts or events into which the court is enquiring. Circumstantial evidence means evidence of relevant facts like motive, plans and preparatory acts, capacity, opportunity, identity, continuance, failure to give evidence, failure to provide evidence and standards of comparison.