MUHAMMAD BASHIR Versus STATE
This petition for leave to appeal arose from a judgment of the Lahore High Court confirming the conviction and death sentence of the petitioner under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of the deceased over a marriage dispute. The core legal question was whether a compromise (Badal Sulah) between the legal heirs of the deceased and the convict could be accepted to mitigate the sentence. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the compromise between the parties was fair and acceptable, leading to the reduction of the death sentence to imprisonment for life, while maintaining the conviction. The key principle laid down is that a genuine compromise between the heirs of a victim and an offender in a murder case can be considered by the court for the reduction of a sentence from death to life imprisonment, subject to the payment of agreed compensation and fine.
- Can a compromise between the legal heirs of a deceased and a convict be accepted in a murder case to reduce a death sentence?
- Whether the Supreme Court can convert a petition for leave to appeal into an appeal and reduce the sentence of death to life imprisonment based on a compromise?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. , J.-- This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court dated 22-12-1981 in Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 1979 (Murder Reference No. 76 of 1979), whereby the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat, dated 2-1-1979 sentencing the petitioner to death was confirmed.
2. The relevant facts are that the petitioner aged 27/28 years was an unmarried man and wanted to marry Mst. Rashida Begum, his first cousin. With this object in view he made a proposal to his uncle Ahmad Khan for the hand of Mst. Rashidan Begum in marriage. But this proposal was turned down by his uncle who instead agreed to give the hand of Mst. Rashidan Begum in marriage to Arshad Mahmud, the real brother of Nasir Mahmood. This marriage was to be solemnised 'on 7-3-1975.
3. On the fateful day, namely, 6-3-1975, the deceased Nasir Mahmud alongwith his father Taj Hussain, P.W.7, his uncle Muhammad Khan, P.W.5 and his cousin Muhammad Ashraf, P.W.6, were going towards Lala Musa Bazar at Chhahwela to make purchases in connection with the marriage of Arshad Mahmud. They were following the railway track and when they reached near the house of Fateh Khan Gujar, Muhammad Bashir, petitioner, appeared on the scene armed with a revolver and fired two shots hitting the deceased in the forehead and the temple region. The deceased, after sustaining these injuries, fell down on the ground. The witneses raised an alarm and the petitioner in order to frighten them fired a shot at them and managed to make good his escape on account of the terror created by him.
4. The injured Nasir Mahmud was taken to the hospital at Lala Musa by the witnesses and the F.I.R. was lodged by Taj Hussain P.W. at 8-40 a. m. at the Police Station, Lala Musa. A few days later, Nasir Mahmud succumbed to his injuries and died on 12-3-1975. On receipt of this information the offence was changed into 302, P.P.C.
5. The Investigating Officer, during the investigation collected blood-stained stone pieces from the place of occurrence and sealed them into a parcel and forwarded the same for its chemical analysis which were ultimately found to be stained with human blood by the Serologist. The petitioner after his arrest also lead the police to a brick kiln in the same vicinity and got recovered the crime-weapon, namely, the revolver, P.1, which was lying buried under the brick kiln. After completion of the investigation the petitioner was sent up for trial and was convicted under section 302, P.P.C. by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat vide his judgment dated 2-7-1979 and sentenced to death. The learned trial Judge also imposed a fine of Rs. 3,000, in default whereof he was to suffer one year further R.I. He was further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 3,000 as compensation to the heirs of the deceased or in default whereof to suffer further R.I. for a period of one year. On appeal and reference, the High Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the sentence of death awarded to the petitioner. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
6. The trial Court as well as the High Court, while convicting the petitioner and awarding the sentence of death had placed reliance on the ocular evidence, the medical evidence, the recovery of revolver as also the motive. Before us, the learned counsel for the petitioner made no attempt to challenge the conviction of the petitioner and frankly conceded that he could not assail its correctness. However, he submitted that Taj Hussain, father of the deceased Nasir Mahmud as also the mother of the deceased had entered into a compromise with the accused ?petitioner and forgiven him for the crime of murder committed by them. The Badal Sulah has been fixed at Rs. 50,000.
7. Mian Imamul Haq, learned counsel for the State, states that the compromise arrived at between the parties is quite fair and he has no, objection if it is accepted.
8. We consider that in all the circumstances, this is a case in which the compromise between the parties can be accepted.
9. We observe that under the orders of the Courts below the petitioner has been ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000 and also to pay compensation amounting to Rs. 3,000 to the heirs of the deceased. We direct that the compensation payable to the heirs of the deceased shall be in the sum of Rs. 47,000 and the amount of the fine ordered to be payable to the petitioner, namely, Rs. 3,000 will remain unaltered except for the modification that if the fine is realised, it shall be paid to the heirs of the deceased.
10. We note that the father of the petitioner has, in view of our above order, paid an amount of Rs. 50,000 to the father of the deceased in our presence. Thus, the entire amount of compensation, as well as the fine imposed upon the petitioner, has been paid and nothing further is liable to be paid to the heirs of the deceased in this connection.
11. The result is that we convert this petition into an appeal and hereby dispose it of. The conviction under section 302, P.P.C. is maintained but the sentence of death is reduced to life imprisonment the petitioner will also be given the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. in computing the sentence he has yet to undergo. The amount fine and compensation having already been paid in its entirety nothing further is to be paid in this regard.
12. The appeal is, therefore, accepted in the above terms.
13. M . Z . M . ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.