Find a Lawyer

Regular Second Appeal No. 45 of 1956, decided on 7th May 1964.

Inheritance‑Murderer or his progeny cannot be allowed to benefit by crime of murder‑Principles of justice, equity and good conscience.

Under the principles of justice, equity and good conscience, a murderer or his progeny cannot be allowed to benefit by his crime of murder. The murderer may be the father alone but if the descendants claim through him even though not merely from him their title becomes tainted as the source or the channel through which the inheritance has to flow to them becomes blocked and extirpated by reason of the crime committed by that source.

Iftikharul Haq Khan for Appellants.

Ch. Riasat Ali Khan for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 7th May 1964.

This second appeal has arisen in the following circumstances: The property in dispute belonged to one Rehman who died on the 25th of August 1951. He left behind a widow Mst. Beguman and two daughters Mst. Rasulan and Mst. Sardaran. Rehman had two sons, named Ahmad Bakhsh and Allah Yar, who were killed on the night between the 11th and 12th of January 1948. Manak respondent and his father Dara were prosecuted for these murders and in the result Dara was sentenced to be hanged by the Sessions Judge, which sentence was confirmed by the High Court. On the death of Rehman on the 24th of August 1951, inheritance mutation of his property was sanctioned in favour of his widow and two daughters but 5/24th share out of it was mutated in favour of Saroo and Manak alias Manoo respondents who were both sons of Dara as collaterals of Rehman deceased. This led to a suit by Mst. Beguman Mst. Rasulan and Mst. Sardaran for a declaration that the respondents being the murderers or abettors of the murders of Ahmad Bakhsh and Allah Yar, sons of Rehman, were not entitled to any share in the property of Rehman and that the plaintiffs‑appellants between themselves were entitled to succeed to the whole property. Mst. Beguman died during the pendency of the suit and the sole surviving contestants were her daughters, Mst. Rasulan and Mst. Sardaran in their personal capacity as heirs of Rehman and also as the legal representatives of their mother Mst. Beguman.

2. The defendants‑respondents resisted the suit alleging that they or their father Data were innocent, of the murders of Rehman's sons and in any case they were entitled to the property of Rehman as he had died two years after the murders of his sons at the time when Muhammadan Law of inheritance was applicable and that they as collaterals (residuaries) were entitled to succeed to the extent of 5/24th share in their own rights. The following issues were framed in the case:

(1) Were not Ahmad Bakhsh and Allah Yar murdered by Dana and Manoo (O. P. D.).

(9) Did these persons commit the murder in order to get the property of Rehman, if so, what is its effect (O. P. P.).

(3) Have not the plaintiffs locus stand to sue and have no cause of action

(4) Relief.

On issues Nos. 1 and 2 the Courts below have held on the basis of the judgments in the criminal case that Manoo defendant and his father Dara were the actual murderers of Rehman and that they had committed his murder in order to get his property. They, however, disallowed the plaintiff's claim for excluding the respondents from inheritance of Rehman on the ground that the rule of exclusion in their case could have applied only to the property of the murdered persons, namely, Ahmad Bakhsh and Allah Yar, and could not be extended to the property of Rehman. The point made is that Ahmad Bakhsh and Allah Yar had no property of their own and at best they had a chance to succeed to Rehman, the succession to whose property which opened two years later is to be governed under the rules of succession which were in force at the time of the demise of Rehman. The rule of law is well‑settled that under principles) of justice, equity and good conscience a murderer or his progeny cannot be allowed to benefit by his crime of murder. The murderer may be the father alone but if the descendants claim a through him even though not merely from him their title becomes tainted as the source or the channel through which the inheritance has to flow to them becomes blocked and extirpated by reason of the crime committed by that source. If the principle is, as already stated, that a murderer and his progeny cannot be allowed to reap the benefit of the crime, the findings of the Courts below, in the present case, upholding the respondents' claim to the property of Rehman, becomes clearly untenable. It is true that Rehman was alive after the murder of his sons and was the full‑fledged owner of the property until the time of his death, but as the murder was committed by Dara, the father of both the respondents, along with Manak respondent with the object of depriving the murdered sons of Rehman from the property and to advance their own chances to get it, they obviously get hit by the law of attainder as well‑recognised in England and in this Country. Rehman may could have disposed of his property during his life‑time after the murders of his sons, or he may have begotton other issues, leading to the ouster of the respondents from inheritance to his estate in the normal way but if that has not happened and if the foul‑play of their father and one of themselves have brought them to a position of claiming inheritance to the estate because of the elimination of the murdered sops the situation is not altered to their advantage to uphold their claim, would certainly amount to giving them the benefit of the crime committed by their father and Manak respondent, which is repugnant to all principles of natural justice and good conscience.

3. In this view of the matter, I will accept this appeal granting to the plaintiffs the declaration prayed for subject to the rights of any other lawful heirs of Rehman deceased to get a share out of his estate. The respondents shall bear the costs of the appellants of this litigation throughout.

S. Q.

Appeal allotted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.