KHURSHID AHMAD vs The STATE
The petitioner sought leave to appeal against the order of the High Court maintaining his conviction and sentence under Section 307 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, where he was sentenced to six years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine. The core legal question concerned the appropriateness of the sentence in light of a compromise reached between the parties who are collaterals and live in the same village. The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal and held that, having regard to the facts and circumstances and the compromise aimed at promoting peace and good relations between the parties, the sentence should be reduced. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court may, in appropriate circumstances involving a compromise between related parties, reduce a criminal sentence to the period already undergone in the interest of fostering harmony.
- Whether the Supreme Court can reduce a sentence under Section 307 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 based on a compromise between the parties?
- Can a criminal petition for leave to appeal be converted into an appeal for the purpose of sentence reduction?
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J. -The petitioner has been aggrieved by an order of the High Court maintaining his conviction and sentence under sentence under section 307 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The petitioner was sentenced to suffer six years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.
2. We are told that the fine had paid and that the petitioner has already served his sentence for about seven months.
3. The petitioner is a collateral of the injured person and lives in the same village. He is 0 years old, and appears to have had a bullet injury on his wrist. According, to the doctor there was a gunshot wound of entrance on the outer side of the left wrist of the petitioner which was communicating with another wound on the outer side of left thumb. A bullet was taken out from this wound. The medical evidence disclosed that the complainant was shot at from a sufficient distance, There was a counter --case by the petitioner against complainant Muhammad Khan the latter was acquitted.
4. The parties have submitted an application before this Court stating that they have compromised the matter in order to prevent further bitterns between the relations.
5. On behalf of the petitioner, therefore, this petition has been pressed on the ground of sentence only.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we think it desirable in the interest of peace and good relations between the parties that we should reduce the sentence to the period already undergone by the petitioner.
7. We accordingly convert this petition into an appeal and allow it and reduce the sentence of six years' rigorous imprisonment passed upon the appellant to the period already undergone by him, and direct that he be released forthwith if neat required in connection with any other matter.
Cited by 9 cases
- SHARIF and another vs THE STATE 1990 P Cr. L J 1300
- GHULAM MUHAMMAD and others vs THE STATE 1985 P Cr. L J 1964
- FEROZE KHAN vs THE STATE 1984 P Cr. L J 2931
- FAQIR MUHAMMAD and others vs THE STATE 1987 MLD 963
- MUHAMMAD ASHRAR AND 5 Others vs THE STATE 1982 P Cr. L J 1012
- IFTIKHAR AHMAD vs THE STATE 1982 PLD Supreme Court 277
- ALLAH DI WAYA AND Others vs THE STATE 1983 P Cr. L J 2205
- MUHAMMAD BASHI R vs THE STATE 1982 PLD Supreme Court 139
- FATEH KHAN AND 2 Others vs The STATE 1983 SCMR 519