Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984

What it is

The Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 (President's Order No. 10 of 1984) is Pakistan's law of evidence. It repealed and replaced the Evidence Act, 1872, re-enacting most of its structure while adding provisions drawn from Islamic injunctions, notably on the competence and number of witnesses (Article 17). Because the framework tracks the 1872 Act, a century of subcontinental evidence case law remains usable, and courts cite it routinely. The Order governs what facts may be proved, how documents are proved, who may testify, burden of proof, presumptions, estoppel, and privilege.

Several articles do most of the work in practice. Article 17 read with Article 79 requires instruments creating financial or future obligations to be attested by two witnesses and proved through them. Articles 38 and 39 keep confessions made to police officers, or made in police custody otherwise than before a magistrate, out of evidence. Article 164 permits the court to receive evidence that has become available because of modern devices or techniques — the gateway for audio, video, call data, and forensic material.

What changed

The Order has been amended at points rather than overhauled. The Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 extended it to electronic documents and signatures, so electronic records are admissible and carry statutory presumptions [SPECIFIC ARTICLES AS INSERTED — TO BE VERIFIED BY REVIEWING LAWYER]. The Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences Relating to Rape) Act, 2016 removed the rule that had allowed the defence in rape cases to attack the complainant's general character (former Article 151(4)). As of mid-2026 we are not aware of a pending comprehensive revision [TO BE VERIFIED BY REVIEWING LAWYER].

The larger movement is judicial. The Supreme Court has required that audio and video recordings be proved genuine — through forensic examination, chain of custody, and identification of voices or persons — before they are acted upon [Ishtiaq Ahmed Mirza v. Federation of Pakistan, PLD 2019 SC 675 — CITATION TO BE VERIFIED]. DNA evidence is treated as strong corroboration in offences against the person. Courts continue to apply the rule that testimony is weighed, not counted, so a single reliable witness can sustain a conviction.

Who is affected

Every litigant in every court, civil or criminal. The Order bears hardest on banks and lenders proving loan and security documents through attesting witnesses, on companies relying on electronic records and system-generated documents, on prosecutors building cases on intercepts and device extractions, and on accused persons testing the admissibility of confessions and recordings.

What to do

Execute instruments of financial obligation before two attesting witnesses whose attendance at trial can realistically be secured, and record their particulars. For electronic evidence, preserve originals, metadata, and a documented chain of custody, and obtain a forensic report from a recognised laboratory before tendering a recording. Prove documents through originals or properly certified copies rather than photocopies. In criminal matters, treat any statement made in police custody as inadmissible when planning the defence, and demand the forensic foundation of any audio or video the prosecution relies on.