PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court has issued guidelines for trail courts, prosecution and lawyers to be adopted while recording testimony of witnesses during trials and pre-trail stages, directing courts to conduct audio visual recording of such testimony.

A bench consisting of PHC Chief Justice SM Attique Shah and Justice Mohammad Ijaz Khan directed that there should be certified transcript recorders responsible for transcription and translation of the recording, and the office of the registrar should devise standard operating procedures (SOPs) regulating their duties.

“Preferably these should be persons with legal knowledge, and as an interim measures, existing staff may be trained for this purpose. Ultimately, however, the responsibility remains with trial judge, who alone is tasked with recording testimony in the manner prescribed,” the bench issued the directives in its 31-page detailed judgement in an appeal in a narcotics case.

The bench directed PHC registrar to implement the direction within six months.

PHC issues guidelines to prosecution and lawyers for evidence recording

The bench took exception to a major discrepancy in the prosecution case as instead of a constable of excise department, Hidayat, who according to record had taken samples of seized narcotics to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), another constable Qaiser Khan was produced as prosecution witnesses before the trial court despite the fact that his name was not mentioned as witness in the challan (charge sheet) form.

The court directed its member inspection team (MIT) office to take notice and initiate proceedings against the trial judge, whereas the district and sessions judge, Peshawar, should take notice to the extent of the relevant staff of district judiciary.

The bench ordered that the director general prosecution should take notice to the extent of the district public prosecutor and public prosecutor, who was on duty at the relevant time.

Similarly, the director general excise, taxation and narcotics control department was directed to take action against the seizing officer and the IO of the case.

In the instant case, the appellant, Mohammad Sabir, was convicted by the trial court on Jan 13, 2025, and was sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs1 million.

Advocate Mohammad Saeed Khan appeared for the appellant and highlighted several loopholes in the prosecution case including the appearance of Qaiser Khan as witness despite not having name in the witness list.

The bench set aside his conviction and remanded the case back to trial court with the direction to re-write the judgement afresh after re-examining the said witness Hidayat or Qaiser Khan, as the case may be.

The bench has given a total of 22 guidelines to trial courts, prosecution and lawyers to follow in relation to testimony of witnesses.

“Henceforth, trial proceedings, and in particular the recording of statements, shall be conducted through the audio video facility available in the courtroom. Until transcript recorders are appointed or otherwise made available, statements shall continue to be recorded through the existing method in addition to the audio video recording,” the bench directed.

The bench directed where the required audio video facility was not available, the concerned district and sessions judge should arrange for its installation in consultation with the registrar of the high court.

“Every trial court shall ascertain complete identity of each witness before recording any statement by personally questioning the witness and noting his demeanor. Each witness shall produce their Computerised National Identity Card (CNIC) and, if a government or departmental employee, their service card, for examination by the court,” the bench ordered.

It directed trial courts to personally administer oath to every witness in open court before examination.

“All statements shall be recorded in a clear and legible manner and shall be signed by the presiding officer after recording of each witness, until digital recording system becomes fully operational,” the bench ordered.

It directed where the identity or role of any witness appeared doubtful, the court should defer examination until verification was obtained from departmental or service records, or from the public prosecutor.

“In cases involving false evidence, forged documents, defective investigation, or deliberate obstruction of justice, the court shall, where necessary, invoke Section 476 CrPC, Section 32 of KP CNSA (Control of Narcotics Substance Act), 2019, and Sections 166(2) and 186(2) of Pakistan Penal Code in accordance with law,” the bench further directed.

It also ordered the prosecution to ensure that the correct names, designations and particulars of all witnesses were accurately entered in the challan form submitted under Section 173 of CrPC.

“Before presenting a witness in court, the prosecutor shall verify the witness’s CNIC and service card and ensure consistency with the challan and police file.”

The bench ordered that in case of any discrepancy, substitution or clerical error in the name or identity of a witness, the matter should be immediately brought to the notice of the court. “The prosecutor must maintain ethical conduct and act to secure justice, not merely conviction,” the bench mentioned in the guidelines.

The court ordered that advocates should remember that their primary duty was to assist the court in administration of justice under Rule 163 of Pakistan Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976.

“Defence counsel shall avoid deliberate concealment of facts, misstatements or procedural lapses that may favour their client but defeat the ends of justice. Failure to uphold these duties may amount to misconduct under Rule l75A of Pakistan Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules,1976,” the bench directed.

Apart from relevant judgements of superior courts and relevant laws, the bench also discussed in detail several international conventions including United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971.

Published in Dawn, December 5th, 2025