MUZAFFAR MUSTAFA Alias ZAFAR ALI vs The STATE
This appeal arises from a conviction under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, where the appellant was sentenced to death for the murder of Abdul Karim. Following the dismissal of his appeal by the Lahore High Court, the appellant sought leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, specifically challenging the sentence in light of a compromise reached between the parties. During the appellate proceedings, the legal heirs of the deceased—the widow, mother, and complainant—appeared before the Court, confirming that a voluntary reconciliation had occurred and that they had received compensation from the appellant's father. They explicitly stated their forgiveness for the appellant. The core legal question was whether the sentence of death should be maintained given this reconciliation. The Court, relying on established precedent regarding the effect of compromise in capital cases, held that the lesser sentence would suffice the ends of justice. Consequently, the Court reduced the sentence of death to imprisonment for life, granted the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, and maintained the fine.
- Can a sentence of death be reduced to imprisonment for life based on a compromise between the parties?
- Is the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 applicable to a sentence reduced from death to life imprisonment?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
M. S. H. QURESHI, J.--This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 17-2-1980, whereby the appellant's appeal against his conviction under section 302, P. P. C. And the sentence of death and fine of Rs. 5,000 or in default in payment thereof, R.
1. For two years, recorded by the trial Court, had been dismissed and the death sentence had been confirmed.
2. The case against the appellant, Muzaffar Mustafa alias Zafar Ali, was that he had on the 7th July 1978 at 10 a.m. Attacked Abdul Karim deceased near the Bus-Stand Mahand within P. S. Channogoth, District Bahawalpur, and inflicted two chhuri injuries which proved fatal. The appellant, who had fled the scene, was arrested the next day and blood-stained shirt and chaddar were recovered from his person while a blood-stained chhurri was recovered from his house at his pointing. During the trial, only Muhammad Ishaq (P. W. 4) supported the case of the prosecution while the other eye-witnesses, namely, Ghulam Yasin (P. W. 1), Abdur Rehman (P. W. 2) and Nazir Ahmad (P. W. 3), did not support for the admitted reason that the parties had compromised the matter. The bus-Conductor Abdur Razzaq (P. W. 5) and bus-cleaner Manzoor Ahmad (P. W. 6) also examined by the prosecution as eye-witnesses, failed to support. The trial Court did not believe the recoveries but relying on the sole evidence of Muhammad Ishaq, as supported by the medical evidence convicted and sentenced the appellant.
3. Leave was granted to the appellant to consider the question of sentence in view of the assertion that the parties have reached reconciliation.
4. Today Ch. Imtiaz Ahmad, learned counsel for the appellant has appeared alongwith Mst Halima Mai (widow of the deceased), Mst. Janat Mai (mother of the deceased) and Ghulam Yasin, the maternal uncle and complai--nant in the case. They were identified by Muhammad Qasim, the Chairman of the Channigoth Union Council, who has produced his identity card in proof of his own identification. They have filed a signed/thumb-marked statement to support the fact that the complainant has compromised the matter and has in satisfaction received the sum of Rs. 70,600 (rupees seventy thousand only) as compensation from the father of the appellant. They have further stated that the compromise was voluntary and that they have forgiven the appellant.
Learned counsel has urged for reduction of the sentence of death in view of the decision of this Court in Muhammad Bashir v. State PLD 1982 SC 139, and for giving the appellant the benefit of section 382-B, Cr. P. C This is not opposed by Mr. Nemat Khan, learned counsel appearing for the State. Considering the circumstance of the case. We are satisfied that the lesser sentence will suffice the ends of justice. We, accordingly, reduce the sentence of death to that of imprisonment for life with benefit under section 382-B, Cr. P. C. But maintain the sentence of fine in terms awarded by the trial Court. With this modification in the sentence, the appeal is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- MANZOOR AHMAD vs THE STATE 1984 P Cr. L J 152