ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday heard an appeal filed by singer Meesha Shafi against the Lahore High Court verdict through which her plea for joint cross-examination of witnesses was rejected.
A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Justice Mushir Alam and comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Yahya Afridi heard the case.
During the course of proceedings, Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan asked Shafi’s counsel under which law he wanted the testimonies of all the witnesses to be recorded together.
He said it was for the court to decide how the statements of the witnesses will be recorded, telling the lawyer that the court could not do the same according to your wishes.
Shafi’s lawyer argued that he wanted to establish before the court what had transpired during the jam session, during which Shafi had accused Zafar of harassing her.
After questioning the counsel about his experience practising law, Justice Ahsan asked the lawyer whether he had ever observed in his 11-year career that the statements of all witnesses were recorded together and then they were cross-examined later.
Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan remarked that there is no such precedent in his 30-year judicial experience.
Meesha Shafi’s lawyer maintained that he could cite several past court judgements to support his client’s appeal.
Read Top Stories
Upon this Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan responded,” You cannot because there are zero court precedents”.
The lawyer argued that the court had talked about the issue in several past verdicts.
Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan remarked that a court judgement is not some divine script. He observed that the court judgements can also be wrong.
The lawyer representing Zafar informed the bench the statement of one out of 11 witnesses has already been recorded.
The court adjourned further hearing of the case until next week, when the lawyer for Zafar will resume his arguments.
It is to mention that Meesha Shafi had filed a petition in the Supreme Court in April after the rejection of her petition by the LHC to have the statements of Zafar’s witnesses recorded and their cross-examination conducted in separate hearings, instead of turn-by-turn examination.
