AYAZ BAIG vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by Ayaz Baig, a condemned prisoner, challenging the Lahore High Court's judgment dated 16-5-2007, which denied a compromise in a murder case on the ground that it was not genuine. The core legal question concerns the validity and acceptance of a compromise in a criminal murder case resulting in a death sentence, particularly regarding its genuineness when pursued at a belated stage after the death of the primary heirs and the remarriage of the widow. The Supreme Court held that the lower courts rightly disallowed the compromise as it lacked genuineness, noting that the widow had remarried years prior and the non-contracting siblings of the deceased could not be ignored when assessing future family harmony. The key principle laid down is that the genuineness of a compromise is a sine qua non for its acceptance by the court in Tazir cases under Section 338-E of the Pakistan Penal Code and Section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- Whether a compromise in a murder case can be accepted when it is submitted at a belated stage after the death of the primary heirs and the remarriage of the widow?
- Is the genuineness of a compromise a sine qua non for its acceptance by the court in cases of punishment as Tazir?
- Can the court refuse to accept a compromise if it lacks genuineness and fails to ensure future harmony between the families?
- Section 338-E, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 345, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.---Ayaz Baig, a condemned prisoner seeks leave to appeal from the judgment dated 16-5-2007 of learned Lahore High Court, whereby compromise in the concerned murder case was denied to him, for not being genuine.
2. The occurrence having taken place in the year 1992, the petitioner was awarded death sentence on 12-9-1994. The conviction as well as the sentence was upheld by this Court in Criminal Petition No,147-L of 1998 vide judgment dated 19-4-2000.
3. The deceased Arif, having died issueless, was survived by Imam Din-father, Mst. Ghulam Fatima- mother and Abida, the widow. The father and mother died in the year 1995 and 2002 respectively while the widow Abida contracted second marriage with one Khalid Javed in the year 1994. Two years after the judgment of this Court, the convict has filed compromise at a point of time when the father and mother were already dead and the widow had contracted second marriage in 1994, loosing all relationship and affinity with her previous husband. It was thus easy to win-over or purchase-over the widow. The compromise does not seem to be genuine for the reason.
4. No doubt, at the time of death, the deceased being issueless and the father being alive, his seven brothers and a sister could not be the legal heirs but now, at a belated stage, they cannot be ignored when the question comes to the genuineness of compromise and when they all are most likely to nurse grudge against the convict. They have not agreed to the instant compromise, which agreement is necessary for the future harmony between the families. With reference to section 338-E, P.P.C. Read with section 345, Cr.P.C_ and in the light of our judgment in Sh. Muhammad Aslam v. Shaukat Ali 1997 SCM R 1307, the genuineness has to be the sine qua non of a compromise which may or may not be accepted by the court, in the circumstances and in cases of punishment as Tazir.
5. Having had regard to the instant background, we are of the view that the learned trial Court as well as the learned High Court have rightly disallowed the compromise being not genuine. The petition being merit-less, is hereby dismissed and leave declined.
Cited by 1 case
- ASIF ZAHEER and another vs THE STATE 2010 YLR 3191