MLD 1995

1995 PLP 1503 (MLD)

MUHAMMAD ANAR‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Appeal No.374 and Murder Reference No.167 of 1987, decided on 27th June, 1994.
Honorable Judges
Rashid Aziz Khan and Muhammad Amir Malik, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1995 PLP 1503 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Rashid Aziz Khan and Muhammad Amir Malik, JJ
Parties MUHAMMAD ANAR‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 1503 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 1503 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rashid Aziz Khan and Muhammad Amir Malik, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 1503 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD ANAR‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Qazi Muhammad Saleem for Appellant. Sh. Ihsan Ahmad for the State.
  • Date of hearing: 27th June, 1994.

Headnotes / Summary

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss.302 & 307‑‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 345‑‑ Compromise‑‑‑Legal heirs of the deceased as well as the injured witness had compromised with the accused of their own free will without any threat or promise and had forgiven him in the name of Almighty Allah without accepting Diyat‑‑‑On tile direction of High Court Diyat money in respect of the minors had been deposited in the Bank in accordance with their shares‑‑ Compromise was consequently allowed and the accused was acquitted accordingly.

Judgment & Decree

RASHID AZIZ KHAN, J.‑‑‑The facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that appellant Muhammad Anar with his, brother Sikandar was tried by Additional Sessions Judge, at Gujrat, for the murder of Mst. Sakina Bibi, and murderous assault on Parveen Akhtar. Learned trial Court vide judgment dated 11‑6‑1987 acquitted Sikandar, co‑accused of the appellant. Appellant Muhammad Anar was, however, found guilty for an offence under section 302, P.P.C. and sentenced to death with a fine of Rs‑.5,000 or in default undergo months' S.I. lie was further sentenced under section 307, P.P.C. to two years' R.I. Muhammad Anar appealed, which was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 6‑6‑1990. However, the sentence of death was converted to imprisonment for life on the request of the learned counsel for the appellant on the ground that there had been a compromise between the parties. Muhammad Anar filed an appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, inter alia, on the ground that once the matter had been compromised, then it should have been dealt with in accordance with law and the appellant should have been acquitted, instead of converting the sentence to imprisonment for life. The Supreme Court set aside the orders of the Division Bench of this Court. However, their Lordships of the Supreme Court observed that the criminal appeal and the Murder Reference before the High Court shall be treated as pending and disposed of afresh in accordance with law.

2. In pursuance of the Directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the appeal as well as the Murder Reference was heard by us. Learned counsel for the appellant stated at the Bar that the parties have effected a compromise and the legal heirs of the deceased have forgiven the appellant.

3. In order to verify the authenticity of the compromise, legal heirs of Mst. Sakina Bibi, deceased, were directed to appear. Riaz son of Fazal Karim stated on oath that Mst. Sakina Bibi was his wife. Out of the said wedlock following issues were born:‑‑‑ (1) Ghulam Abbas 16 years of age, (2) Ijaz 13 years of age and (3) Mst. Nazia, 10 years of age. He further stated that he had effected a compromise and forgiven the appellant in the name of Almighty Allah without accepting Diyat. He was identified by Mr. Q.M. Salim, Advocate. Statement of Ghulam Abbas was also recorded. He also confirmed the compromise having been effected. Mst. Parveen Bibi stated that she and her minor son Imtiaz were also injured and she has forgiven the appellant in the name of Almighty Allah and did not wish to accept Diyat. After recording the statements of the witnesses and going through the same, we are convinced that a compromise has been effected between the parties and the legal heirs of the deceased have forgiven the appellant of their own free‑will without any threat or promise. As far as the evidence produced by the prosecution is concerned, we have gone through the same and are of the view that it inspires confidence and can safely be relied upon. The witnesses were put to the test of lengthy crossexamination, but their credibility could not be shaken. Therefore, it is held that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing its case against the appellant. As has been held that the legal heirs of Mst. Sakina Bibi, deceased, have effected a compromise and forgiven the appellant without accepting Diyat, it was directed by this Bench that Diyat money in accordance with the shares in respect of minors be deposited. The needful has been done. The amounts of shares deposited in Habib Bank Limited, Mangat Branch, District Mandi Bahauddin are given below with their Accounts Nos:‑‑‑ 1 Ghulam Abbas PLS Savings A/C No.4739‑7 Rs.51,183 2 Nazia PLS Saving A/C No. 4726‑3 Rs.25,591 3 Ejaz Ahmad PLS Saving A/C No.4725‑1 Rs.51,183 It is directed that the amount so deposited in PLS Saving Account Numbers shall not be withdrawn till the minors, namely, Ghulam Abbas Ejaz and Mst. Nazia, aged 16 years, 13 years and 10 years, respectively, have attained the age of 18 years. Relying upon the statements of Riaz and Mst. Parveen Bibi, we allow the compromise and set aside the conviction and sentence of Muhammad Anar. He shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Death sentence is not confirmed. A copy of the judgment shall be sent to concerned branch of the Bank. N.H.Q./M‑2002/L Compromise accepted.