ALLAUDDIN vs THE STATE
This criminal matter arises from an order passed by the VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, East, which refused an application for permission to compromise an offence under Section 308 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 on the ground that the complainants were not competent to forgo the Diyat amount on behalf of a minor. The core legal question concerns the competency of a Wali to compound an offence and forgo Diyat on behalf of a minor with the court's permission. The Sindh High Court held that a Wali is indeed competent to forgo Diyat on behalf of a minor. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside and the case was remanded to the trial court for a fresh decision in accordance with the law and established precedent. The key principle laid down is that a Wali may compound an offence involving Diyat on behalf of a minor with the permission of the court.
- Can an offence punishable under Section 308 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 be compounded by the legal heirs of the deceased?
- Is a Wali competent to forgo the Diyat amount on behalf of a minor with the permission of the court?
- What is the procedure when a trial court refuses permission to compromise an offence involving a minor's Diyat?
- Section 308, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted an authority by any learned brother Mr. Abdul Ghani Shaikh, J. (as he then was) in Criminal Appeal No.50 of 1998. To support his contention that the offence punishable under section 308, P.P.C. Can be compounded by the legal heirs of the deceased and further that if any of the legal heir is minor then on behalf of the minor the Wali can compound the offence and forgo the Diyat amount with the permission of the Court. Learned VII th Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, East refused the application for grant of permission to compromise solely on the ground that the complainants in the case were not competent to forgo the Diyat of minor on her behalf.
2. From the perusal of the authority relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant, it is clear that the Wali is competent to forgo the Diyat on behalf of the minor. In the circumstances, the order, dated 29-4-2000 passed by the learned VII th Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, East is set aside. E The case is remanded back to the trial Court for taking decision in accordance with the law and the rule laid down by the authority, referred hereinabove.
Cited by 3 cases
- GHULAM SHABBIR Versus COURT OF 1ST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE WEST AT KARACHI 2018 YLRN 193
- SABIR vs The STATE and another 2013 YLR 1787
- ABDUL QAYYUM vs The STATE 2014 MLD 1046