MUHAMMAD JAVED And Another vs THE STATE And Another
This matter concerns a criminal appeal arising from the conviction and death sentence imposed upon the petitioner, Muhammad Javed, for the murder of an Advocate. The core legal question addressed by the Supreme Court was whether a compromise reached between the convict and the legal heirs of the deceased, involving the payment of compensation (Diyat), warrants the commutation of a death sentence to imprisonment for life. The Court observed that the legal heirs, including the widow and other family members, had voluntarily forgiven the petitioner and received a sum of Rs. 70,000 as compensation. Consequently, the Court held that the compromise was valid and sufficient grounds existed to alter the sentence. The Court maintained the conviction but commuted the capital sentence to imprisonment for life, while upholding the fine. The key principle laid down is that in cases of murder, a voluntary compromise between the convict and the legal heirs of the deceased, supported by the payment of compensation, constitutes a valid basis for the appellate court to commute a sentence of death to imprisonment for life.
- Can a death sentence be commuted to imprisonment for life based on a compromise between the convict and the legal heirs of the deceased?
- Does the voluntary forgiveness of a convict by the legal heirs of the deceased constitute sufficient grounds for the appellate court to alter a capital sentence?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD HALEEM.J.--Petitioner Muhammad Javed was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of Barkatullah Saleemi, an Advocate. He has left him surviving his father Tajuddin, two brothers Muhammad Saeed and Muhammad Bashir, one sister Mst. Begum Bibi and his widow, and had himself no issue.
2. The widow is not present in the Court, but her first cousin Mian Muhammad Saqib Nisar, an Advocate, present in Court states that she had told him on telephone that she has forgiven the petitioner voluntarily and of her own free will, and as to the compensation, she would share with the other heirs from the amount of Rs.70,000 paid to them. The other heirs of the deceased have also stated that they have forgiven the petitioner voluntarily and have today received in Court Rs.70,000 in cash paid on behalf of the petitioner.
3. Accordingly, Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 364 of 1982, is converted into an appeal and disposed of in terms that while maintaining the conviction, the capital sentence is altered to imprisonment for life, but the fine is maintained.
4. The learned counsel for Muhammad Saeed withdraws Criminal Petition No. 372 of 1982 and so also the Additional Advocate-General withdraws Criminal Petition No. 369 of 1982, in view of the compromise, which are, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn.