Find a Lawyer

Criminal Appeal No. 138 of 1981, decided on 16th December, 1984.

(On appeal from the judgment, dated 5‑7‑1980 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Cr. A. No.103 of 1979 and Murder Reference No. 104 of 1979).

‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 5.302‑‑Compromise‑‑Deceased, step‑mother of accused persons‑‑Conviction of accused found fully justified‑‑Complainant, real son of deceased and half‑brother of accused persons filing affidavit before Supreme Court to the effect that in view of close relationship between parties and on account of intervention of elders of family and with a view to maintaining peace and amity between family members, children of deceased lady have forgiven their two half‑brothers (accused) for murder of their mother and they request that accused be acquitted‑‑Held, it would be in interest of families compromise was accepted but since conviction of accused under S. 302/34, P.P.C. was fully Justified, question of acquitting merely on plea of complainant was not sustainable‑‑Penalty of death sentence in case of one accused reduced to that of life imprisonment and penalty of life imprisonment imposed on other accused maintained in circum stances.

Muhammad Bashir v. The State PV L D 1982 S C 139 ref.

‑‑‑S.302‑‑Compromise‑‑Sentence‑‑Compromise not providing monetary compensation, held, could be treated in certain cases as a good ground for reducing sentence.

Qazi Muhammad Salim, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants.

Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for the Complainant, Karam Elahi Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for the State.

Date of hearing 16th December, 1984

.‑‑Muhammad Hanif and Muhammad Shafiq sons of Umar Din were tried for the murder of their step‑mother Mst. Zenab Bibi under section 302/34, P.P.C. Both of them were found guilty by the learned Sessions Judge, Kasur vide his order dated 23‑12‑1978 under section 302/34, P.P.C. and were sentenced to death. They were also ordered to pay a fine of Rs.5,000 each, in default of payment of fine they were ordered to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment.

On appeal and reference, a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court upheld the conviction of the appellants but reduced the sentence of Muhammad Shafiq from death to imprisonment for life. Thus, the judgment of the trial Judge was upheld, except with this modification. This appeal, by leave of this Court, is directed against the afore mentioned judgment and order of the High Court.

The deceased, as noted already, was the step‑mother of the appellants being the younger wife of their father Umar Din. The complainant Muhammad Afzal, P.W.9, is her real son and the half‑brother of the appellants. Since the judgment was delivered by the High Court, the parties have entered into a compromise. In pursuance thereof, Muhammad Afzal has filed an affidavit before us to the effect that in view of the close relationship between the parties and on account o the intervention of the elders of the family and with a view to maintaining peace and amity between its members, the children of Mst. Zenab Bibi deceased have forgiven their two half‑brothers (the accused appellants) for the murder of their mother and they request that they may be acquitted.

We have considered the circumstances of the case as also the, affidavit of the complainant and feel that it would be in the interest of the families if the compromise is accepted There is, of course, no question of acquitting the appellants merely on the plea of the complainant when we find that their conviction under section 302/34, P.P.C. is fully justified. However, we can, in such a situation, impose the lesser penalty on Muhammad Hanif, appellant, as held by us in Muhammad Bashir v. The State P L D 1982 S C 139.

Mr. Karam Elahi Bhatti, learned counsel for the State has no objection to the Court accepting the compromise but submits‑ that in this case as no compensation is being paid by Muhammad Hanif, appellant, to the heirs of the deceased the compromise cannot be accepted.

We do not find any force in this submission because this Court has already held in Iftikhar Ahmad v. The State P L D 1982 S C 277 that a compromise, which is reached even without providing monetary compensation, can be treated as a mitigating circumstance for reducing the sentence of death to imprisonment for life.

We respectfully agree with the dictum that a compromise, which does not provide for payment of any monetary compensation can, in certain cases, be treated as a good ground for reducing the sentence. In the circumstances of this case, we are fully satisfied that the compromise entered into between the parties should be taken into account for this purpose.

The result is that, though the conviction of the appellants under section 302/34, P.P.C. is maintained, the sentence of death imposed upon Muhammad Hanif, appellant, is reduced from death to life imprison ment. The sentence of fine however, is maintained, so also the conviction and sentence of Muhammad Shafiq, appellant, who has already been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment only, is maintained. However, both of them will be given the benefit of the provisions of section 382‑8, Cr.P.C. in the matter of computing the sentence that they have yet to undergo.

The appeal is accepted to the extent indicated above.

M. Z. M. Order accordingly.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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