SH. JAFFAR HUSSAIN vs AMIR ALI And Another
This matter concerns two petitions for special leave to appeal filed by the complainant and the State, respectively, challenging a High Court judgment that acquitted one accused and altered the conviction of another from Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 to Section 304-II of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. Regarding the complainant's petition, the petitioner sought to withdraw the appeal on the basis of a compromise reached between the parties. The Supreme Court allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the complainant's petition accordingly. Regarding the State's petition, the Court examined the impugned High Court judgment to determine if any legal error existed. Upon hearing the State counsel and reviewing the record, the Court found no flaw in the High Court's reasoning or decision. Consequently, the Court dismissed the State's petition for leave to appeal. The judgment affirms the finality of the High Court's decision in the absence of demonstrated legal error and acknowledges the right of a petitioner to withdraw a petition following a compromise between the parties.
- Can a petitioner withdraw a petition for special leave to appeal if a compromise is reached between the parties?
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with a High Court judgment where no legal flaw is demonstrated by the State?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 304-II, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-- This order will dispose of (i) Crl. PSLA No. 467/80 filed by Sh. Jaffar Hussain complainant against the outright acquittal of Amir A.I and alteration of the conviction of Zulfiqar from section 302, PPC to under section 304-II, PPC, and (ii) Cr.P.505/80 filed by the state for the same purpose.
2. Learned AOR for the petitioner in Cr. PSLA No.467/80 submits that the parties have arrived at a compromise between themselves and as such he has instructions not to press the petition and to withdraw the same. This petition is, therefore, dismissed as withdrawn.
3. We have heard the learned State counsel with regard to Crl. P. No. 505/80 and have gone through the impugned judgment of the High Court. He has not been able to point out any flaw in the impugned judgment.
This petition is, therefore, also dismissed.