ZAHOOR vs THE STATE
The appellant, Zahoor, challenged his conviction and life imprisonment sentence for the murder of Gulzar Ahmad under section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, as imposed by the trial court. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant filed an application seeking acquittal based on a compromise reached with the legal heirs of the deceased. The court requisitioned a report from the Sessions Judge, Sargodha, to verify the genuineness of the compromise. The report confirmed that the major legal heirs had waived their right to Qisas and Diyat in the name of Almighty Allah. Regarding the minor legal heirs, the court found their interests sufficiently safeguarded through the transfer of land valued at Rs. 2,00,000. Satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise and the protection of the minors' interests, the court accepted the compromise, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant. The court further directed the Tehsildar to place a restriction on the transferred land to prevent its alienation until the minors attain majority.
- Can a conviction for murder be set aside based on a compromise between the accused and the legal heirs of the deceased?
- What measures must be taken to safeguard the interests of minor legal heirs when a compromise is reached in a murder case?
- Is the transfer of land a valid method to satisfy the Diyat share of minor legal heirs in a criminal compromise?
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 345, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 310, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
' M. BILAL KHAN, J.---Zahoor son of Muhammad Hayat (appellant) along with four others, namely, Arif son of Mula, Shah Muhammad son of Muhammad Yar, Mumtaz and Ahmad alias Ahmi sons of Shah Muhammad had been tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhalwal, District Sargodha for the murder of Gulzar Ahmad deceased. The learned trial Judge by virtue of his judgment dated 17-3-2007 found him guilty of the said charge convicted him under section 302(b), P.P.0 and sentenced him to imprisonment for life with further direction to pay a sum of Rs,1,00,000 to the legal heirs of the deceased by way of compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.0 or in default of payment thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also extended to him. The learned trial Judge, however, by giving the benefit of doubt to his co-accused, namely, Arif, Shah Muhammad Mumtaz and Ahmad alias Ahmi had acquitted them of the charge.
2. The appellant by filing the instant appeal has called in question the conviction and sentence awarded to him through the impugned judgment dated 17-3-2007. During its pendency, an application under section 345, Cr.P.0 bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No,724-M of 2007 was filed on behalf of the appellant seeking his acquittal on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. I propose to dispose of both these matters together through this single judgment.
3. Report with regard to the genuineness of the compromise was requisitioned from the learned Sessions Judge, Sargodha, which has been received. A perusal thereof reveals that Gulzar Ahmad deceased was survived by Mst. Sardaran Bibi (mother), Mst. Kausar Bibi (widow), Umar Hayat (brother), Mst. Rasoolan Bibi (sister), Mst. Asmat Bibi and Mst. Shamaila Gulzar (minor daughters).
The learned Sessions Judge recorded statements of the major legal heirs, wherein they stated that they had entered into compromise with the appellant and had compounded the offence in the name of Almighty Allah by waiving their right of Qisas and Diyat. They further stated that they had no objection if the appellant is acquitted of the charge.
4. As regards share of Diyat of the minors, namely Mst. Asmat and Mst. Shamaila, a parcel of land valued at Rs,2,00,000 had been transferred in their names on 15-6-2007 vide Mutation No,818 of 2007. A copy of the said mutation is attached with the report submitted by the learned Sessions Judge.
5. After going through the report, I am satisfied with regard to the genuineness and correctness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. Insofar as interest of the minor legal heirs of the deceased is concerned, it has been observed that in view of the provisions of section 310 P.P.C, the same has been sufficiently safeguarded by transfer of land in their favour. However, the office is directed to inform the Tehsildar concerned to make an endorsement against the aforementioned mutation that the property to the extent of the minors share shall not be transferred in any way by anyone acting on their behalf till they attain majority. A report to this Effect shall also be inserted in the Roznamcha Waqiati. A copy of the endorsement made and copy of the Roznamcha Waqiati shall be transmitted to this Court through Deputy Registrar (Judi.) which shall be made part of the judicial file.
6. In view of above situation, I accept this appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant and acquit him of the charge. He is directed to be released from jail forthwith, if not required in any other case. Criminal A Miscellaneous No,724/M of 2007 also stands disposed of.