Supreme Court of Pakistan (Appellate Jurisdiction)
Mst. Nayab v. The State through P.G. Sindh and others
Criminal Petitions Nos. 1033 & 1036 of 2024; Crl. M.A. No. 1207/2024 in Crl.P.L.A. No. 1033/2024
Question of law
The legal question
What must a trial court do when a witness shows that the written deposition does not accurately reproduce testimony preserved in a video recording?
Holding
What the Court decided
The Trial Court must judicially address the witness's objection under Section 360(2) Cr.P.C. It must compare the video with the written examination and cross-examination in the presence of the parties and prosecutor, and record every discrepancy, omission or inaccuracy, together with the correct version, in a memorandum forming part of the record. A refusal to exercise this jurisdiction may impair the evidentiary record and the right to a fair trial.
Result
Outcome and directions
The Supreme Court set aside the orders of the Trial Court and the Sindh High Court. It directed comparison and correction within fifteen working days, followed by re-arguments and a decision of the criminal case within a further thirty working days. The reasons were approved for reporting.
Judgment text is provided for legal research and general information. Verify the official court record before relying on it in proceedings.
Independent analysis
Read Shahbaz Shah's legal commentary
In Mst. Nayab v. The State, the Supreme Court held that courts must address material differences between video-recorded testimony and the written deposition. The ruling connects Section 360 Cr.P.C. with Article 10-A and explains how the record should be corrected through a judicial memorandum.
Read full commentary →