2005 PLP 812 (YLR)

BASHIR A. MUJAHID, J.

Muzammil Hussain, petitioner, after having tried under section 302, P.P.C. in case F.I.R. No. 295, dated 2‑6‑1993 registered under sections 302/109/34, P.P.C. at Police Station, Civil Lines, Gujrat, vide judgment, dated 1‑2‑1995 was convicted by Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat for the murder of Muhammad Bashir and Mst. Sughi, Khanum and sentenced to death as Qisas. He was also ordered to pay compensation of Rs.50,000 to the legal heirs of both the deceased under section 544‑A, Cr.P.C. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court vide judgment, dated 25‑1‑2001 and death sentence awarded by the Trial Court was confirmed and the criminal appeal filed by him before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was dismiss on 22‑3‑2002. A review petition filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 17‑9‑2003 with an observation that petitioner for compromise be filed before the concerned Court. The petitioner moved an application under section 338‑E, P.P.C., which has been declined by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat vide order, dated 8‑1‑2004, and the said order has been impugned through the instant criminal revision.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on the case reported as Sikandar Hayat and another v. Allah Ditta and 9 others (2004 PCr. LJ 530), Bashir Ahmad v. The State and another (2004 SCMR 236), Sh. Muhammad Aslam and another v. Shukat Ali alias Shauka and others (1997 SCMR 1307) and Amir and another v. The State (2003 SCMR 561) argued that both the deceased Muhammad Bashir and Sughra Khanum were survived by their sons namely, Wahid Ahmad, Yar Muhammad and daughter Mst. Naghmana Kaukab apart from Ahmad Hassan, son; all the legal heirs of both the deceased, except Ahmad Hassan had entered into compromise, they got their statements recorded before the learned Additional Sessions that they would have no objection if the petitioner was acquitted.

3. The petition has been opposed by the learned counsel for the State, but he has no objection to the acquittal of the petitioner if the share of Diyat amount to the extent of Ahmad Hassan is deposited in Court.

4. We have heard the learned counsel and examined the file. The petitioner was convicted under section 302(a), P.P.C. and sentenced to death as Qisas. All the legal heirs of the deceased except Ahmad Hassan, one of the sons of the deceased, have compromised with the appellant and they have got their statements recorded that they have no objection to the acquittal of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that as one of the legal heirs of the deceased has not compromised, he has no objection if the sentence of death of the petitioner is altered to imprisonment for life. In view of the above, we partly accept this criminal revision and convert the sentence of death of the petitioner on each count to imprisonment for life on each count. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. The order of the trial Court regarding payment of compensation is maintained. He shall also be entitled to benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. H.B.T./M‑767/L Revision partly accepted.