تضاد (contradiction) کی جامع تعریف --- آرٹیکلز Exhibit کرانے کا مکمل طریقہ کار

The expression “contradiction” is wide in scope and brings within its compass all the legal omissions, shortcomings and lacunas, besides that is applicable in situations when the acceptance of deposition of (naeem)one witness necessitates the rejection of another.

In P Ramanatha Aiyar’s Advanced Law Lexicon 4th Edition volume 1, the term “contradiction” is characterized in the following way:-

“The word „contradiction‟ means the setting of one statement against another and not (naeem)the setting up of a statement against nothing at all.”

-------------------------------

آرٹیکلز Exhibit کرانے کا مکمل طریقہ کار

For tendering in evidence, the articles having incriminating worth, guidelines are provided in the Rules & Orders of the Lahore High Court Lahore Volume-III, Chapter-24 Part-B. In the referred chapter the procedure is provided for bringing on record the articles and documents (naeem)having nexus with the case. For reference sake Rules 14-F & 14-H are being referred hereunder:-

“14-F.Every article to be produced.---Clothes, weapons, money, ornaments, food and every article which forms a part of the circumstantial evidence should be produced in Court and their connection should be proved by the witnesses.

14-H.Exhibits.- All exhibits should be marked with a letter or numbers. Articles which are produced in evidence should have a label attached to them bearing a number, and that number should be quoted (naeem)throughout the record wherever any such article is referred to and should be distinctly marked as “admitted or not admitted”.

If the exhibits have already been assigned numbers by the police, that series of numbers should be mentioned to avoid confusion. A printed label should be affixed or attached to each exhibit containing the following particulars:-

(i) Number of exhibit

(ii) Produced by

(iii) Admitted(Signature of Court)

(iv) Date

(v) Case

(vi) Description of exhibits.

The Sessions Judge, should see that these entries are properly made.”

The incriminating articles recovered from the appellant were not produced and tendered in accordance with Rule 14-F & 14-H (ibid), thus cannot be (naeem)read in evidence. The phraseology of these Rules is explicit in sense and depicts the requirement of proving the connection of the recovered article with the case and lays emphasis on authenticating their identity through the statements of the witnesses. The abortiveness in fulfilling the required criteria leads to the exclusion of evidence so tendered, providing no option to the Court for placing reliance upon them. Indeed, the recovered articles and relevant documents are exhibited to prove the fact so alleged (naeem)against the accused facing trial. Besides that the purpose of exhibiting a case property during trial is aimed at providing an opportunity to the accused for cross-examining the witnesses in reference to it so as to extract something beneficial in his favour.

------------------------'

According to Section 29 though in the wake of recovery of some contraband substance a presumption adverse to the accused facing trial is to be marked but still prosecution cannot be absolved from obligation of proving its case beyond shadow of any doubt. The burden of Section 29 will tilt towards accused only if the recovery (naeem)of narcotics, its nexus with the accused along with origin as contraband substance is proved by the prosecution beyond shred of any ambiguity. The language of Section 29 is akin to the wordings of Section 8 of The Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Court) Act 1975, Section 9 of the Offences In Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance 1984 and Section 14 of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999. All the afore-mentioned provisions came under judicial scrutiny and it was resolved by the courts that prosecution cannot be given leverage of not proving its case against the accused beyond any doubt and (naeem)failure to discharge such obligation will culminate in judgment of acquittal.

It explicates from the facts mentioned in the preceding paras that the case of the prosecution is replete with contradictions pertaining to the mode and manner of recovery, description and ownership of the vehicle used in the crime, safe custody of the recovered substance as well as its origin. The rigors and horrors emanating from the stringency of punishment provided for a felony in a statute must not drive a Court to dispatch an accused to jail for serving an imprisonment of longer duration even in the wake of (naeem)failure of prosecution to prove its case beyond scintilla of any doubt.