PHOOLAN BIBI Versus ALAU-UD-DIN
This criminal appeal challenges an acquittal judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura, which acquitted the respondents in a murder case based on a compromise. The appellant, claiming to be the father of the deceased, argued that the trial court erred by failing to record fresh statements from the legal heirs regarding the compromise before passing the acquittal order. The core legal question was whether the trial court acted illegally by relying on compromise statements recorded earlier during bail proceedings rather than recording new statements at the time of acquittal. The Lahore High Court held that the acquittal was sustainable because the legal heirs had previously received the Diyat amount and formally recorded their statements waiving the right of Qisas during the bail proceedings. The Court established the principle that once legal heirs have received Diyat and recorded a valid compromise before a court, they cannot subsequently withdraw from that compromise to challenge an acquittal based thereon. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine.
- Can legal heirs withdraw from a compromise after receiving the Diyat amount and recording their statements in court?
- Is an acquittal order based on a compromise valid if the trial court relies on statements recorded during bail proceedings rather than recording fresh statements?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 506, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 186, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Respondents Nos.1 to 11 vide impugned judgment, dated 26-2-2004 were acquitted by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura, on the basis of compromise having been effected between the legal heirs of the deceased in case F.I.R. No.357, dated 13-1-2000 under sections 302, 324, 506, 186, 148, 149, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Shahkot District Sheikhupura. Feeling aggrieved by the respondents' acquittal the appellant who is father (sic) of the deceased had filed this appeal.
2. We have heard the appellant's counsel who has mainly argued that the learned trial Court while allowing the respondents' application for acquittal on the basis of compromise did not record the statements of the legal heirs of Taj Din-deceased to the effect that they had effected compromise with the respondents and as such the order of acquittal has been passed on illegal premises and is not sustainable.
3. The impugned judgment reveals the names of legal heirs of Taj Din deceased. During the course of hearing of a bail-petition all the legal heirs settled Diyat amount of Rs.3,00,000 which was paid to them and then they waived their right of Qisas and got recorded their statements before learned Addl. Sessions Judge Sheikhupura on 13-1-2001 to the effect that they had effected compromise with the respondents and consequently they were enlarged on bail. The legal heirs of the deceased after having effected compromise and receiving Diyat amount cannot be allowed to withdraw from the compromise, therefore, the learned trial Court had rightly recorded the respondents' acquittal on the statements regarding compromise of legal heirs of the deceased recorded on 13-1-2001 during bail proceedings. The appeal is dismissed in limine.
N.H.Q./P-43/L Appeal dismissed.