YLR 2011

2011 PLP 2326 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD SARWAR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Revision No.574 of 2011, decided on 1st June, 2011.
Honorable Judges
Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2011 PLP 2326 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi, J
Parties MUHAMMAD SARWAR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
Primary Law Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 PLP 2326 (YLR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2011 PLP 2326 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 PLP 2326 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD SARWAR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Representation

  • Tanveer Chaudhry for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 302

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 345

Qatl-e-amd

Compromise

Requisites. Widow and son of deceased who appeared in the court had recorded their statements that they had entered into compromise with accused and had received amount of compensation

According to list of legal heirs, mother of the deceased was also alive, but was not produced in the court

Effect

Mother of the deceased who was alive and was also the legal heir of the deceased was not produced

No compromise was permissible without the consent of the mother

Provisions of S.345, Cr.P.C., were to be kept in view while accepting or rejecting the compromise

Incomplete compromise would not carry any weight

Trial Court had rightly held that requisites for compromise in a compoundable case, were not fulfilled.

Judgment & Decree

ALTAF IBRAHIM QURESHI, J.

This revision petition is directed against the order dated 16-5-2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, whereby he dismissed the application of the present petitioners moved under section 265-K, C.P.C. with the following observation:. "Rani Bibi complainant and wife of deceased as well as Muhammad Abdul Rehman, son of deceased, appeared in the court and recorded statements of compromise in favour of the accused petitioners by admitting that they have received an amount of compensation of Rs.10,00,000 from the accused petitioners. According to list of legal heirs, mother of the deceased is also alive but she was not produced in the Court. In this background, requisites for compromise in a compoundable case are not fulfilled".

2. It is well-settled that no compromise can be accepted being acted upon without satisfaction of the Court. Admittedly, the mother of the deceased is alive, who is also the legal heir of the deceased and no compromise is permissible without her consent. Provisions as contemplated in section 345, Cr.P.C. were to be kept in view while accepting or rejecting the compromise. Incomplete compromise would not carry any weight. Petitioner may, if so advised, approach the same court by filing a fresh application on the basis of complete compromise. The order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore dated 2-6-2011 is in accordance with law and calls for no interference by this Court. This petition having no force is dismissed. H.B.T./M-929/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.