Pakistan Case LawLIAQAT Versus THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which maintained the petitioner's convictions under sections 148 and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, despite acquitting him of other charges following a compromise. The core legal question is whether a defense counsel in a criminal case possesses the authority to withdraw an appeal or concede guilt on behalf of an accused, thereby binding the accused to that decision, particularly when the underlying offense is non-compoundable. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether such a concession by counsel, made without the explicit authorization of the accused, is legally valid or if the court is obligated to decide the case on its merits regardless of the counsel's stance. The key principle to be determined is the extent of a defense counsel's authority to make concessions in criminal proceedings and whether such actions can prejudice the rights of the accused when they contradict the accused's interests or lack express authorization.
- Can a defense counsel in a criminal case validly withdraw an appeal or concede the guilt of an accused without the accused's express authorization?
- Is a court obligated to decide a criminal appeal on its merits even if the defense counsel chooses not to press the appeal regarding specific convictions?
- Does a concession made by counsel regarding a non-compoundable offense bind the accused in criminal proceedings?
ORDER
SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J.---The petitioner was tried alongwith five others under section 302/307/148/149, P.P.C. By the Additional Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi. The petitioner was convicted under section 307/148/149, P.P.C. The petitioner was sentenced under section 307, P.P.C. To 5 years R.I., fine of Rs,10,000 and compensation to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased and each of the injured person in the case amounting to Rs,5;000. Under section 148, P.P.C., the petitioner was sentenced to 3 months R.I. And under section 149, P.P.C., he was sentenced to 2 months R.I. And fine of Rs,500. The petitioner appealed against his conviction and sentences as aforesaid before the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, and during pendency of the appeal he and other convicts entered into a compromise with the legal heirs of the deceased and the injured persons in the case. The compromise was accepted by the learned High Court and as a consequence thereof the petitioner was acquitted of the charges under section 307, P.P.C. With regard to the conviction of petitioner under section 148/49, P.P.C. The learned High Court observed as follows in the impugned judgment:--
As regards the conviction and sentence of the appellants under section 148/149 P.P.C., the same being non-compoundable and having not been challenged by the learned counsel for the appellants, is maintained. All the appellants are stated to have undergone their sentence on these counts, so they have earned their right of acquittal.
Muhammad Ashfaq and Muhammad Banaras appellants are stated to be in jail. They be acquitted forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case. The appellants are stated to have been released after undergoing their sentences, so they have also undergone their sentence under section 148/149, P.P.C.
' In view of the above, we accept this appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellants under section 302/307, P.P.C. And acquit them from the said charge. However, their conviction and sentence under section 148/149, P.P.C. Is maintained. The appeal as well as the Murder Reference No, 172/92 and Cr.M. 639-M/93 stand disposed of accordingly."
'In seeking leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of High Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended before us that the petitioner never authorised his counsel not to press his appeal before the High Court against conviction under section 148/149, P.P.C. And as such if the counsel for the petitioner did not press the appeal in so far it related to his conviction under section 148/149, P.P.C. It was an act without authority which could not bind the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner also contended that in a criminal case, a counsel appearing for an accused cannot make concession accepting the guilt of the accused or withdrawing the appeal against the conviction on the basis of his power of attorney and notwithstanding such concession, the Court would proceed to decide the case on merit, especially when the Court found that the compromise placed before the Court related to a non-compoundable offence. To support his contention the petitioner's counsel has relied on the case of Muhammad Latif v. Muhammad Hussain (1968 SCM R 269(1), Muhammad Ashiq v. State (PLD 1970 SC 177). The contention requires examination and we, accordingly, grant leave to appeal to consider the same.
Judges on this bench
- Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry1,248 judgments
- Saiduzzaman Siddiqui789 judgments