IBRAHIM and 2 others vs THE STATE
This appeal arises out of convictions and sentences under sections 302/34 and 307/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code for murder and attempted murder. During the proceedings, the parties filed a compromise application wherein the major legal heirs of the deceased waived their right to compensation and forgave the appellants. The matter was referred to the Sessions Judge, Nawabshah, who verified the factual position and the statements of the legal heirs, noting that some heirs were minors. The Supreme Court directed the appellants to deposit the minors' shares of Diyat money in PLS bank accounts, which was duly complied with. The State counsel conceded that the compromise was in accordance with law and that it was not a fit case to invoke section 311 of the Pakistan Penal Code for Tazir. The Supreme Court accepted the compromise, set aside the convictions, and ordered the immediate release of the appellants.
- Can an appellate court accept a compromise between the parties in a murder case involving minor legal heirs?
- What procedure must be followed when minor legal heirs are involved in a criminal compromise regarding Diyat?
- When may the court decline to press into service section 311 of the Pakistan Penal Code for imposing Tazir despite a valid compromise?
- Section 302/34, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 307/34, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 311, Pakistan Penal Code
ORDER
1. ' AJMAL MIAN, J.---Subject-matters of this appeal were two murders namely of Shahmir son of Sultan Jatoi, Allah Bux son of Muhammad Ali Jatoi and causing grievous injuries to Sarang. The appellants under section 302/34, P.P.C. For the murders of Shahmir and Allah Bux were awarded life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs,10,000 or in default to suffer R.I. For six months on two counts separately whereas under section 307/34, P.P.C. For attempting to commit murder of P.W. Sarang, they were awarded R.I. For five years and to pay a fine of Rs,5,000 or in default to suffer R.I. For three months. The parties filed an application containing compromise. According to above compromise the major legal heirs of deceased Shahmir and Allah Bux have waived their right to claim any compensation and have forgiven the appellants A for the above offences. The matter was referred to the learned Sessions Judge, Nawabshah with the direction to send for the legal heirs and to record their statements in order to ascertain correct factual position. The learned Sessions Judge has submitted his report dated 2-12-1993 alongwith the statements of the major legal heirs. In the above report the learned Sessions Judge has verified that deceased Shahmir left behind an issueless widow Mst. Assat, father Sultan and mother Mirzadi whereas the other deceased Allah Bux left two minor sons namely Sikandar and Shaman, besides widow Momal and father Muhammad Ali. It is also stated in the above report that compensation e of Rs,2,000 was awarded in the Faisla, but the injured and the heirs of the deceased persons had forgiven the accused and did not accept that compensation.
2. ' On 22-12-1993 this Court had directed the appellants to deposit minors' shares of Diyat money in a Bank in a P.L.S. Account to be opened in the name of each minor. The appellants have filed photostat copies of the two C certificates issued by the U.B.L. Kazi Ahmed Branch certifying that Rs,75,000 have been deposited in each of the accounts of the above two minor sons of Allah Bux.
3. Photocopies of the deposit slips have also been filed. Mr. Mujeeb Pirzada, learned A.S.C. Has also shown the original of the above photostat copies.
4. ' Mr. A.G. Mangi, Additional Advocate-General, Sindh for the State has examined the above documents and states that the compromise is in accordance with law. He further submits that since the parties are closely related and as the object of the compromise is to create cordial relations between them, it is not fit case in which this Court should press into service section 311, P.P.C. For imposing punishment of Tazir. We are also inclined to take the same view.
5. ' The above compromise is accepted. The appellants are ordered to be released forthwith unless they are required in any other case.
6. Compromise accepted.
Cited by 1 case
- ABDUL QAYYUM vs The STATE 2014 MLD 1046