HASAN DIN And Another vs THE STATE
This criminal appeal arises from a murder case where the parties sought to dispose of the matter through a compromise. Initially, the court announced the acceptance of the appeal based on the compromise. However, during the preparation of the formal order, it was discovered that the interests of two minors were involved and that the compromise on one side had been executed by an agent via a power of attorney, which failed to meet the required legal standards and procedural safeguards. The matter was referred back to a chamber hearing to rectify these omissions. The legal question concerned the validity of a criminal compromise involving minors and agents where mandatory procedural safeguards were initially unfulfilled. The court held that a compromise in a murder case involving minors requires direct participation, proper safeguarding of minors' financial interests through secured bank deposits, and rectification of procedural defects. Consequently, upon fulfillment of these conditions by depositing the requisite compensation for the minors and filing proper affidavits, the compromise was accepted and the appellants were acquitted.
- Can a criminal appeal in a murder case be disposed of on the basis of a compromise when the interests of minors are involved?
- Whether a compromise effected by an agent through a power of attorney satisfies the procedure for accepting a compromise in criminal cases?
- How should the financial interests and share of minor heirs be protected when a compromise is accepted in a murder case?
- Enforcement of Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, 1991
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ. ---Arguments in this criminal appeal, in a case of murder, which was sought to be accepted and disposed of through a compromise were heard on 23-1-1992. Learned counsel from both sides represented to us that there is not only a compromise in writing which had been placed on record but also that all the conditions laid down by this Court in the form of a pro forma stood duly satisfied. Similar representation was made in the Chamber hearing before one of us with the result that the case was then also found. To be fit for compromise. Accordingly, we accepted the compromise and announced the acceptance of the appeal on the aforesaid basis of compromise.
2. During the preparation of the order it was discovered that not only the interest of two minors was involved in the case but also that the compromise had been effected from one side by an agent on the basis of a power of attorney. This obviously did not satisfy the spirit underlying the procedure and form prescribed by this Court for accepting a compromise for disposal of criminal appeals. Accordingly, the completion of the formal order for the disposal of the appeal on the basis of compromise was postponed and the matter was again referred for Chamber bearing.
3. The omissions with regard to the minors in the pro forma as well as in the compromise having been pointed out they have now been supplied. Bank receipts showing deposit of nearly Rs.43,000 for the benefit of the minors have been placed on record. Similarly the omission with regard to the direct participation of some other heirs has also been rectified and affidavits sworn by them have been placed on record. The further chamber hearing resulted in the following order (in Chamber): "Mr. Talib Hussain Rizvi, Advocate has filed fresh affidavits of the widow Mst. Saddan, sons Rashid and Sadiq and of the two daughters of the deceased Mst. Zainab and Mst. Illi saying that "according to Islamic Law `Qisas and Diyat' Ordinance, 1991, they have compromised with the convict/accused persons Mohammad Ramzan and Hassan Din and also waived/compounded without receipts of `Badl-e-Sulh' or `Arsh' under the Law." The affidavits have been attested by the M.P.A. As regards the two minor sons of the deceased Haq Nawaz and Nazir, learned counsel states that on their beha:f affidavits have been riled by their mother Mst. Saddan and after receipt of their share she had deposited a sum of Rs.42,982 in the Allied Bank, Multan. Receipts filed. This amount shall not be withdrawn by her nor she would operate the account. The amount may be withdrawn by the two minors when they attain majority.
4. After the acceptance of the compromise it may be directed that the amount deposited in the Allied Bank, Multan in the name of Mst. Saddan shall not be released except on the order of this Court for the benefit of the two minors namely Nazir and Haq Nawaz."
5. We order accordingly.
6. On the acceptance of the compromise as directed above all other legal consequences shall also now follow including that the appellants stand acquitted.
7. M.BA./H-140/S
Cited by 3 cases
- ABDUL QAYYUM vs The STATE 2014 MLD 1046
- NOOR MUHAMMAD vs THE STATE 1993 P Cr. L J 1437
- JAVAID MASIH Versus STATE 1993 SCMR 1574