Question 1

When can the police arrest a person without a warrant?

Accepted Answer

Under section 54 of Pakistan’s Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898—not the Pakistan Penal Code—a police officer may arrest a person without a Magistrate’s order or warrant when:
- The person is involved in a cognizable offence, or there is a reasonable complaint, credible information, or reasonable suspicion of such involvement.
- The person possesses a housebreaking implement without a lawful excuse; the person must prove that excuse.
- The person has been proclaimed an offender under the CrPC or by order of the Provincial Government.
- Suspected stolen property is found in the person’s possession, and the person is reasonably suspected of an offence relating to it.
- The person obstructs a police officer performing official duties, or has escaped or attempted to escape lawful custody.
- The person is reasonably suspected of deserting Pakistan’s armed forces.
An arrested person must be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours, excluding necessary travel time, and cannot be detained longer without a Magistrate’s authority. (Source: Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, section 54)

Question 2

How many witnesses are required to attest an instrument for a financial transaction under the Qanun-e-Shahadat?

Accepted Answer

Under Article 17 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, a written instrument concerning financial or future obligations must be attested by either two men, or one man and two women. Evidence must be presented accordingly. (Source: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984, section Article 17)

Question 3

What standard of proof is required for zina liable to hadd under the 1979 Ordinance?

Accepted Answer

Under section 8 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, zina liable to hadd must be proved in either of these ways:
1. Confession: The accused confesses to the offence before a court of competent jurisdiction; or
2. Eyewitness testimony: At least four adult Muslim male eyewitnesses testify to the act of penetration. The court must be satisfied, through *tazkiyah al-shuhood* (an inquiry into credibility), that they are truthful and abstain from major sins.
If the accused is non-Muslim, the eyewitnesses may also be non-Muslim. (Source: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979, section 8)

Question 4

How is a First Information Report (FIR) registered and who may lodge it?

Accepted Answer

Under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, when information disclosing a cognizable offence is given to the officer in charge of a police station:

- If given orally, the officer must reduce it to writing.
- If submitted as a written complaint, the officer must receive it.
- The substance must then be entered promptly in the prescribed FIR register/Form 24.5(1), with the case receiving its registration number.
- At this preliminary stage, the police officer does not assess the information’s truthfulness or credibility; the officer must register the case and begin the investigation.

An FIR may be lodged by an informant who is not necessarily an eyewitness and need not know every detail of the incident. It is enough that the information discloses a cognizable offence and provides reason to suspect that the offence occurred. An FIR is not required to contain every fact or item of evidence; those details may be gathered during investigation.

For a non-cognizable offence, section 155 CrPC provides a different procedure: the police record the substance of the information rather than registering it as a cognizable FIR under section 154. (Source: Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, section 154)

Question 5

What is the maximum period of physical remand the police can obtain?

Accepted Answer

Under section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, the maximum physical remand is 15 days in total.

A Magistrate may grant a shorter period and extend it, but the combined period cannot exceed 15 days. If the accused is transferred to judicial custody before those 15 days are exhausted, the police cannot retake physical custody in the same case merely to use the remaining days. (Source: Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, section 167)

Question 6

When can a magistrate acquit an accused before the trial is completed?

Accepted Answer

Under section 249A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, a Magistrate may acquit an accused at any stage before completion of the trial if:

- the prosecutor and the accused have both been heard;
- the Magistrate records reasons for the decision; and
- the Magistrate considers either that the charge is groundless or that there is no probability of conviction for any offence.

By contrast, stopping proceedings under section 249 CrPC without pronouncing a judgment of acquittal or conviction—and releasing the accused—is not an acquittal. (Source: Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, section 249-A)

Question 7

What power does the High Court have over a person illegally detained (habeas corpus)?

Accepted Answer

The High Court may order that a person illegally or improperly detained in public or private custody within its appellate criminal jurisdiction be brought before the Court and set at liberty.

Under section 491(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the High Court may also direct that:

- A detained person be produced before it and dealt with according to law.
- A prisoner be brought before a court to testify.
- A prisoner be produced before a court-martial or commission.
- A prisoner be transferred from one custody to another for trial.

The High Court can review the legality of detention without being restricted by the technicalities of section 491 or traditional habeas corpus procedure. Habeas corpus is available against any authority or private person suspected of unlawful detention. There must, however, be detention—meaning physical confinement or any other restriction on liberty—and the petition must expressly allege illegal detention. (Source: 2024 LHC 3860 — MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE VS SHO ETC (Mr. Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh))

Question 8

What happens if an accused person absconds and does not appear before the court?

Accepted Answer

If an accused absconds and does not appear, the court may take coercive steps to secure arrest, declare the accused a proclaimed offender after due process under section 87 Cr.P.C., and may proceed to pronounce judgment despite the accused’s absence.

Key consequences include:

- An accused who deliberately evades arrest is an absconder. If, after a court-issued public proclamation, the accused still fails to appear within the stipulated time, the court may formally declare them a proclaimed offender. Every proclaimed offender is an absconder, but not every absconder is automatically a proclaimed offender.
- Under section 512 Cr.P.C., the court may preserve witness evidence where it is satisfied that the accused has absconded and there is no imminent prospect of arrest. That evidence may later be used against the arrested accused only if the witness is dead, incapable of testifying, or cannot reasonably be produced without unreasonable delay, expense, or inconvenience.
- Non-appearance does not by itself invalidate a criminal judgment under section 366(3) Cr.P.C.
- If convicted in absence, a perpetual arrest warrant may be issued so the accused can be arrested and made to serve the sentence. (Source: 2025 LHC 6151 — Muhammad Khaliq Vs The State etc. (Mr. Justice Muhammad Jawad Zafar))

Question 9

Is a confession made to a police officer admissible in evidence in Pakistan?

Accepted Answer

Generally, no. Under Article 38 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, a confession made to a police officer cannot be proved against an accused. Article 39 also bars a confession made while in police custody unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, subject to Article 40. A co-accused’s admission before police likewise cannot be used as evidence against another accused.

An exception exists under section 21H of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. In proceedings under that Act, a voluntary confession made during investigation before a police officer not below the rank of District Superintendent of Police may be admitted against the accused if other evidence raises a reasonable probability that the accused committed the offence and the court considers the confession fit for admission. (Source: 2024 LHC 3779 — Salman Hamid Vs The State etc (Mr. Justice Muhammad Tariq Nadeem))

Question 10

What is the right of cross-examination under the Qanun-e-Shahadat?

Accepted Answer

Under the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, cross-examination is a substantive right of the adverse party and must be allowed after examination-in-chief.

- Article 133: A witness is first examined-in-chief, then cross-examined if the adverse party wishes, and afterward may be re-examined. Cross-examination must concern relevant facts but is not limited to matters raised in examination-in-chief. If new material is introduced during re-examination, the adverse party may cross-examine further on it.
- Article 140: A witness may be questioned about prior written statements. To contradict the witness through such a statement, their attention must first be drawn to the relevant portions.
- Article 141: Questions may be asked to test the witness’s truthfulness, establish their identity or position in life, or challenge their credibility—even where the answers may incriminate them or expose them to a penalty or forfeiture.
- Leading questions are permissible during cross-examination.
- Denying a proper opportunity to cross-examine may violate the right to be heard and constitutional due process under Article 10-A.

Additionally, under Article 150, the court may permit a party to put cross-examination-type questions to its own witness when that witness gives adverse or unexpected evidence. This is a judicial discretion and should not be used merely to fill gaps in the party’s evidence. (Source: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984, section Article 133)

Question 11

Can a court release a convicted first-time offender on probation instead of sentencing them to prison?

Accepted Answer

Yes. Under section 5 of Pakistan’s Probation of Offenders Ordinance, 1960, a court may, instead of immediately sentencing a convicted offender to imprisonment, release them under a probation order after considering the offence’s nature, the offender’s character, and other circumstances.

The court must:

- Record its reasons in writing.
- Place the offender under a probation officer’s supervision for one to three years.
- Require a bond, with or without sureties, to commit no offence, keep the peace, maintain good behaviour, and appear for sentencing if called upon.
- Be satisfied that the offender—or a surety—has a fixed residence or regular occupation within its jurisdiction and is likely to maintain it during the bond period.

The court may also impose rehabilitative conditions concerning residence, environment, abstention from intoxicants, or other appropriate matters. Probation is discretionary, not automatic merely because it is a first offence. (Source: Probation of Offenders Ordinance 1960)

Question 12

Can a young first-time offender avoid a prison sentence?

Accepted Answer

Yes. A young first-time offender may avoid immediate imprisonment if the court considers probation appropriate.

Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, a person under 21 with no proven previous conviction may be released on probation where the offence is not punishable by death or life imprisonment. The court considers the offender’s age, character, antecedents, and the circumstances of the offence.

Under the Probation of Offenders Ordinance, 1960, the court may instead order supervision by a probation officer for one to three years. The offender must enter into a bond to commit no offence, keep the peace, remain of good behaviour, and appear for sentencing if called. The court must also be satisfied that the offender or a surety has a fixed residence or regular occupation within its jurisdiction. Probation is discretionary, not automatic. (Source: Probation of Offenders Ordinance 1960)

Question 13

Can the High Court interfere with concurrent findings of two lower courts?

Accepted Answer

Yes, but only in exceptional circumstances. The High Court ordinarily will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact by two lower courts merely to reassess the evidence.

Interference may be justified where the findings involve:

- misreading or non-reading of material evidence;
- absence of evidence or perverse conclusions;
- patent illegality or erroneous application of law;
- jurisdictional defect or excess of jurisdiction;
- material irregularity or failure to follow judicial procedure; or
- manifest failure of justice.

Under section 115, C.P.C., revisional jurisdiction is narrow and limited. Likewise, constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 is not a substitute for an appeal or further revision. If the lower courts properly appraised the evidence, gave sound reasons, and acted within their jurisdiction, their concurrent findings should not be disturbed. (Source: 2026 LHC 1296 — Javed Iqbal Vs Data Chemical (Pvt) Ltd (Mr. Justice Malik Muhammad Awais Khalid))

Question 14

What can a magistrate do when a land dispute threatens a breach of the peace?

Accepted Answer

Under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, a Magistrate of the First Class may:

- Make a written order stating why the land dispute is likely to cause a breach of the peace.
- Require the parties to appear personally or through lawyers within a specified time.
- Require each party to submit a written claim concerning actual possession of the disputed property.
- Direct service of the order on the relevant persons and publication of at least one copy as prescribed.

For this purpose, “land or water” includes buildings, markets, fisheries, crops or other land produce, and the property’s rents or profits. (Source: Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, section 145)

Arrest, Evidence and Criminal Procedure in Pakistan — Answers With the Section Cited