Criminal Liability and Procedural Fairness in Pakistan:Examining the Relationship between Substantive Criminal Law and Criminal Judicial Procedures

Abstract

Criminal liability is legitimate only when the State proves the elements of an offence through procedures that respect legality, liberty, evidentiary reliability and the constitutional right to a fair trial. This article examines the relationship between substantive criminal law and criminal judicial procedure in Pakistan through the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 (PPC), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 (CrPC), Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984 (QSO), Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973, and the Torture and Custodial Death (Prevention and Punishment) Act 2022. Using doctrinal legal analysis, it argues that procedural fairness is not external to substantive criminal liability. The PPC identifies prohibited conduct, fault requirements, participation rules, defences and punishments; investigation, evidence and procedure determine whether those requirements can lawfully and reliably be attributed to an individual. Article 10A constitutionalizes this relationship by guaranteeing fair trial and due process in the determination of criminal charges. The article integrates Pakistani case law on reasonable doubt, presumption of innocence, identification evidence, defective investigation, bail, trial delay, confessions, forensic proof and appellate scrutiny. It further compares Article 10A with Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and considers the prohibition of torture as both a human-rights safeguard and an evidentiary safeguard. The article concludes that effective crime control and procedural fairness are not opposing objectives: professional investigation and reliable evidence strengthen legitimate convictions while protecting against wrongful punishment.