MEHR KHAN vs THE STATE
This matter arises from criminal appeals and a murder reference following the conviction and death sentence of the appellants under Section 302(b)/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of the deceased. During the pendency of the proceedings, compromise applications were filed under Section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 seeking acquittal based on a compromise between the parties. The core legal question was whether the compromise between the legal heirs of the deceased, including provisions for a minor legal heir through the transfer of land towards Diyat, was genuine, voluntary, and legally effective to warrant the acquittal of the convicts and non-confirmation of the death sentence. The Lahore High Court held that the compromise was genuine, voluntary, and adequately safeguarded the interests of the minor legal heir. Consequently, the court accepted the appeals, set aside the convictions and sentences, acquitted the appellants, and answered the murder reference in the negative. The key principle laid down is that a genuine compromise involving all legal heirs, including proper safeguarding of a minor's share through Diyat, forms a valid basis for compounding an offence under Section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and resulting in acquittal in murder cases.
- Whether a compromise between the parties can be accepted for the compounding of an offence under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- How are the interests of a minor legal heir safeguarded when accepting a compromise involving the transfer of land as Diyat?
- What is the effect of a genuine and voluntary compromise on a murder reference and pending criminal appeals for conviction?
- Section 302/34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302(b)/34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 345, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' M. BILAL KHAN, J.-Mehr Khan son of Muhammad Amir and Haji Muhammad Saeed son of Muhammad Shamir had been tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab for the murder of Ahmad Khan deceased in case F.I.R. No, 173, dated 16-11-2004 registered with Police Station Gunjial, District Khushab for an offence under section 302/34, P.P.C. The learned Trial Judge by virtue of his judgment dated 30-11-2005 found them guilty of the said charge, convicted them under section 302(b)/34, P.P.C. And sentenced them to death each with further direction to pay a sum of Rs,50,000 each to the legal heirs of the deceased by way of compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. Or in default of payment thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for six months each.
2. Both the convicts by filing Criminal Appeals Nos.337-J and 1951 of 2005, respectively, have called in question convictions and sentences awarded to them vide the impugned judgment, whereas the learned Trial Judge has sent Murder Reference No,797 of 2005 for confirmation of said sentence of death awarded to the convicts. During pendency of these matters, separate applications under section 345, Cr.P.C. Bearing Crl. Miscellaneous Nos.313/M and 314/M of 2007 had been filed on behalf of the applicants in the respective appeals seeking their acquittal on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. We propose to dispose of all these matters together through this single judgment.
3. Reports with regard to 'the genuineness of the compromise were requisitioned from the learned Sessions Judge, Khushab, which have been received.. A perusal thereof reveals that Ahmad Khan deceased was survived by Mst. Fateh Bibi (mother), Mst. Alam Khatun (widow), Hasnain Ahmad, Nadeem Alam and Zulqarnain (sons), Zulqarnain, one of the sons of the deceased was minor. All the major legal heirs got recorded their statements, in which they stated that they had entered into compromise with the appellant voluntarily and had compounded the offence in the name of Almighty Allah after receiving Badl-e-Sulah in the shape of transfer of land in their names to the extent of their respective shares of Diyat. They further stated that they had no objection if the appellants are acquitted of the charge.
' Insofar as the minor legal heir, namely, Zulqarnain is concerned his mother Mst. Alam Khatun has also appeared on his behalf and pardoned the appellants on his behalf because they had also transferred land in his name to the extent of share of Diyat qua him. Keeping in view this situation, we are of the view that the interest of the minor has been safeguarded.
4. After going through the report and in view of the transfer of land in the name of minor son of the deceased, we are satisfied with regard to the genuineness and correctness of the legal heirs of the deceased and voluntary nature of the compromise arrived at between the parties.
5. In view of the above situation, we accept these appeals, set aside the convictions and sentences awarded to the appellants and acquit them of the charge. They are directed to be released from jail forthwith if not required in any other case. Crl. Miscellaneous Nos.313/M and 314/M of 2007 also stand disposed of.
6. In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, death sentence awarded to the appellants is NOT confirmed and murder reference is answered in the negative,