' MAZHAR HUSSAIN MINHAS, J.--Through the instant criminal revision, the petitioner who is complainant of case F.I.R. No,109, dated 22-3-2008 under section 365-A, P.P.C. Read with section 7 ATA Police Station City Kehror Pakka, District Lodhran, has assailed the order, dated 14-7-2008 passed by learned Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court No,II, Multan, whereby P.W.7 Ali Nawaz abductee has been declared incompetent to record evidence on account of his tender age.
2. We have heard arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondents Nos. 2 to 5 and learned DPG for State and have gone through the record with their assistance.
3. P.W.7. Ali Nawaz was produced before the learned trial Court on 14-7-2008. He was put certain questions to judge his intellect and competence. He correctly answered the questions regarding his sisters, friends and the chips he likes to eat. However, he could not tell the number of his house and telephone installed therein. Similarly he could not properly differentiate between `Daada' and `Naana' and in reply to this question, and Budha'.
4. As regards competence of witness to give evidence, Article 3 of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 provides that all persons are competent to testify unless the Court considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them, or from giving rational answers to those questions, by tender years, extreme oldage, disease whether of body or mind or any other cause of the same kind. Under this provision, the test of competence of a witness is that he understands the questions and gives rational answers. It is not necessary that he should answer all the questions correctly. We are of the view that he is quite intelligent and he has replied the questions put by the learned trial Court, in a rational manner. His ignorance about house number or telephone number cannot be considered as his disqualification to be competent witness. Even an elder might not be remembering his house or telephone number. His inability to correctly differentiate between `Daada' and `Naana' is also of not much importance and he cannot be declared as incompetent witness on this ground.
5. In view of the above, we hold that the observation of learned trial Court is not correct and the impugned order is not sustainable in law. Hence, we allow this criminal revision, set aside the impugned order and direct that evidence of Ali Nawaz minor be recorded as a P.W. We have been informed that as many as nine P.Ws. Have been recorded and only said witness is left to be recorded. Therefore, we direct the learned trial Court to conclude the trial preferably within three months of receipt of this order.
6. Disposed of.