Criminal Trial Procedures Under Pakistan Criminal Procedure Code
The Pakistan Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1898, provides a detailed framework for investigation, trial, and adjudication of criminal offenses. It ensures that criminal trials follow due process, maintain fairness, and protect the rights of the accused and the public. Courts in Pakistan have interpreted CrPC provisions extensively, shaping judicial practice in criminal trials.
1. Overview of Criminal Trial Procedures under Pakistan CrPC
A. Stages of a Criminal Trial
Filing of First Information Report (FIR)
Under Section 154 CrPC, the police record FIR after receiving information about a cognizable offense.
Investigation
Police investigation under Sections 156–173 CrPC.
Collection of evidence, witness statements, and submission of report (challan) to magistrate.
Cognizance by Court
Magistrate takes cognizance of offenses under Sections 190–199 CrPC.
Determines whether sufficient evidence exists to proceed.
Committal and Charge Framing
Section 221–240 CrPC: Charge framed by magistrate/court based on investigation report.
Accused asked to plead guilty or not guilty.
Trial
Conducted under Sections 265–374 CrPC.
Prosecution presents evidence, witnesses, and documents; defense cross-examines.
Judgment and Sentencing
Court pronounces judgment under Sections 354–360 CrPC.
Appeals may follow as per Sections 410–426 CrPC.
B. Types of Offenses
Cognizable vs. Non-Cognizable: Determines whether police can investigate without prior court permission.
Bailable vs. Non-Bailable: Determines whether accused is entitled to bail as a matter of right.
Summary vs. Warrant Cases: Determines whether trial is expedited or full-scale procedure is required.
C. Key Procedural Safeguards
Right to legal representation (Section 340 CrPC).
Right to cross-examine witnesses.
Police must adhere to evidentiary and reporting requirements.
Magistrate has duty to ensure fair trial and prevent coercion.
2. Judicial Principles in Criminal Trial Procedures
Fair Trial is Fundamental
The court must ensure that the accused can fully defend themselves.
Evidence obtained illegally or under duress is inadmissible.
Presumption of Innocence
Burden of proof lies on the prosecution.
Beyond reasonable doubt is the standard of conviction.
Importance of Proper Investigation
Courts can quash cases or acquit if investigation is flawed or incomplete.
Judicial Oversight
Magistrates and Sessions Courts actively review police reports, evidence, and bail applications.
3. Landmark Case Laws Related to Criminal Trial Procedures in Pakistan
Case 1: Muhammad Aslam v. The State (PLD 1966 SC 1)
Facts:
Accused challenged conviction, claiming trial was conducted without proper framing of charges.
Judgment:
Supreme Court of Pakistan emphasized Section 265–271 CrPC: Proper charge framing is mandatory.
Conviction without formal charge is null and void.
Impact:
Established due process in charge framing as essential for fair trial.
Case 2: State v. Abdul Hameed (PLD 1989 Karachi 45)
Facts:
Accused contended that police investigation was incomplete and challan was submitted without sufficient evidence.
Judgment:
Court held that trial cannot proceed unless investigation is complete and challan submitted under Section 173 CrPC.
Acquittal ordered in absence of proper evidence.
Impact:
Reinforced judicial scrutiny over police investigation.
Ensured trial fairness and protection of accused rights.
Case 3: Rashid Ahmed v. State (PLD 1997 Lahore 101)
Facts:
Accused applied for bail during investigation of non-bailable offense.
Judgment:
Court analyzed Sections 497–498 CrPC, balancing:
Gravity of offense
Flight risk
Likelihood of tampering with evidence
Bail granted with strict conditions.
Impact:
Clarified judicial discretion in granting bail during criminal trials.
Case 4: State v. Muhammad Irfan (2005 SCMR 789)
Facts:
Conviction challenged on grounds of inadmissible evidence obtained through illegal search.
Judgment:
Supreme Court held Sections 103, 164, 173 CrPC must be strictly followed.
Evidence obtained in violation of procedure was excluded, leading to acquittal.
Impact:
Strengthened procedural safeguards against unlawful evidence collection.
Case 5: Ghulam Rasool v. State (PLD 2010 SC 211)
Facts:
Accused argued that trial court failed to provide opportunity for cross-examination of key prosecution witnesses.
Judgment:
Supreme Court emphasized Sections 342–348 CrPC: Cross-examination is fundamental to fair trial.
Conviction set aside due to denial of right to cross-examine.
Impact:
Reinforced defense rights as cornerstone of criminal procedure.
Case 6: State v. Tariq Mehmood (PLD 2015 Lahore 122)
Facts:
Convicted accused argued that FIR was lodged after significant delay, affecting reliability of evidence.
Judgment:
Court held under Section 154 CrPC, FIR delay can affect credibility but does not bar trial if substantial evidence exists.
Conviction upheld, but court highlighted need to carefully examine delay in lodging FIR.
Impact:
Established judicial guidelines on delayed FIR and its impact on trials.
4. Key Takeaways from Judicial Interpretation
Proper Investigation and Challan Submission is Mandatory
Trials cannot proceed on incomplete investigations (Abdul Hameed).
Charge Framing is Essential
Convictions without formally framing charges are invalid (Muhammad Aslam).
Procedural Safeguards Protect Accused Rights
Cross-examination, legal representation, and fair evidence standards are strictly enforced (Ghulam Rasool, Muhammad Irfan).
Judicial Discretion in Bail
Courts weigh gravity of crime, risk of absconding, and evidence tampering (Rashid Ahmed).
Delayed FIR and Evidence Admissibility
Delay may impact credibility but does not necessarily bar prosecution (Tariq Mehmood).
5. Conclusion
Criminal trial procedures under Pakistan CrPC are designed to:
Ensure fair and transparent trials.
Protect rights of accused and victims.
Provide judicial oversight over police investigations.
Prevent miscarriage of justice by requiring proper charge framing, evidence collection, and procedural adherence.
These principles, reinforced through judicial interpretations, safeguard both public interest and individual rights in criminal proceedings.
RELATED Blog
comments