AZHAR MAHMOOD vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan by way of a petition converted into an appeal, challenging the payment schedule of Diyat imposed by the High Court in a criminal matter. The core legal question concerns the relaxation of the Diyat payment timeline for a convicted person unable to pay due to poverty. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner's request to pay a partial amount immediately and the remaining balance in specified instalments over a period of one year should be accepted, with the consent of the State. The Court laid down the principle that appellate courts may modify payment schedules for Diyat keeping in view the financial hardship and poverty of the convict, subject to default consequences of arrest and detention until full payment is made.
- Can the Supreme Court modify the payment schedule of Diyat on the ground of the convict's poverty?
- What are the consequences of failing to pay instalments of Diyat as directed by the court?
ORDER
' On 23-4-1999 the learned High Court while disposing of the appeal of the petitioner passed the following orders:-- ' ...Keeping in view all the above situation of the present case the sentence which the appellant has already undergone is treated to be sufficient in the circumstances of the case and also in the interest of justice. However, the amount of `Diyat' is' maintained. Appellant is directed to pay the `Diyat' amount either in lump sum or in three equal instalments and the first instatment he would pay on 24-5-1999 before the learned trial Court and the other two instalments would be paid after three months each. In case he fails to pay the first instalment, he will be taken into custody and would undergo simple imprisonment in the Jail till he pays the same. With these observations, this appeal stands disposed of."
2. According to the learned counsel, on account of poverty, the petitioner could not arrange the amount of "Diyat" and is prepared to pay Rs.50,000 (Fifty thousand), out of the total amount of "Diyat" of Rs.1,72,000, with the Trial Court today and would deposit the balance amount in three instalments within the period of one year from today. The instalments would be payable by 22-8- 2000, 22-11-2000 and 22-2-2001 and in case he fails to deposit the instalments by the above mentioned period, he shall be liable to arrest and detention in jail till such time that he makes the full payment of the balance amount of "Diyat".
Learned counsel representing the State has no objection to the acceptance of the request made on behalf of the petitioner.
' In the above circumstances the petition is converted into appeal and allowed in the above terms.