MUNIR AHMAD AND Another vs The STATE
This petition for leave to appeal arose from the conviction of the petitioners for a murderous assault, initially under Section 307/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which was subsequently altered by the Sessions Judge to Section 324/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, with a reduced sentence of one and a half years rigorous imprisonment. The matter had been pending in the High Court for approximately ten years before being dismissed. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether a compromise reached between the parties after a significant lapse of time—twelve years post-incident—could be accepted to set aside the conviction. The Supreme Court, noting that the complainant and victim had confirmed the compromise with the petitioners, who were his neighbors, exercised its discretion to accept the composition. Consequently, the Court converted the petition into an appeal, allowed the appeal based on the compromise, and acquitted the petitioners, ordering their immediate release. The judgment affirms the principle that in appropriate circumstances, particularly where the victim consents, a compromise can be recognized to resolve criminal proceedings even at the appellate stage.
- Can the Supreme Court accept a compromise between parties to set aside a criminal conviction at the leave to appeal stage?
- Does the confirmation of a compromise by the complainant justify the acquittal of the accused in a case of murderous assault?
- Is a long delay in the disposal of a revision petition a relevant factor when considering a compromise between parties?
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD GUL, J.----This petition is barred by 23 days. However, we condone the delay for the reasons stated in the application for condonation.
2. The petitioners were convicted by the trial Court under section 307/34, P. P. C. For murderous assault on Abdul Wahid and sentenced to three years R. I. Each. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge altered their conviction to that under section 324/34, P. P. C. And reduced the sentence to one and an half year R. I. Their revision in the High Court remained pending for about 10 years but was ultimately dismissed. The petitioners now seek leave to appeal.
3. The incident took place about 12 years ago. It appears that the parties; have compounded the offence. A notice was issued to Abdul Wahid. He was; complainant in the case and victim of the assault who confirmed that he has compounded the offence with the petitioners who are his mohallahdars.
4. Having regard to the circumstances we accept the compromise between the parties, convert this petition into appeal, accept the same on the basis of the composition between the parties and acquit the petitioners. They shall be released forthwith unless required in some other case. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.