1983 PLP 631 (SCMR)

Nematullah, Advocate Supreme Court with Iqbal Ahmed Quraishi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate Supreme Court with S. M. Zubair Asstt. A.‑G. for the State. Date of hearing : 14th February, 1983. ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑Nazar Muhammad petitioner was tried alongwith 7 others by Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, for offence. under sections 148 and 302/307(149, P.P.C. for the murder of Khadi Hussain, and causing injuries to some of the P.Ws. The learned Trial Judge convicted the petitioner under section 302, P.P.C. and sentenced it; to death and also to a fine of Rs. 5,

000. The others were convicted under section 325/149, P.P.C. and sentenced them to 3 years' R.I. each. All them filed appeal before the High Court which vide its judgment dated I G December, 1982 dismissed the appeal. The conviction of Nazar Muhammad (petitioner herein) was maintained and his sentence of dean was confirmed. As regards the remaining accused, the High Court also maintained their conviction but reduced their sentence under section 32.4 149, P.P.C. to those that already undergone by them. Feeling aggrieved Nazar Muhammad petitioner has filed the present petition for Leave to Appeal.

2. It may be mentioned that the F.I.R. in this case was lodged by Lal Muhammad (P.W. 9), who is the real uncle as well as father‑in‑law of the deceased. When the case came up for hearing before this Court or 31st January, 1983, Mr. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate appeared on behalf of Lal Muhammad, complainant, and presented an application by Lal Muhammad as well as Ghulam Qadir, the real father of the deceased, to the effect that the parties had compromised the matter and that the heirs of the deceased had accepted compensation from the father of the convict‑petitioner. This application is supported by the affidavits of La: Muhammad P.W. and Ghulam Qadir who were present in Court. The widow of Khadim Hussain was not produced as she was stated to be it advance stage of pregnancy, therefore, her presence was dispensed with. When the case came up before us today the petitioner's counsel has also filed an application in addition to the earlier application filed by the complain ant party to the effect that the parties have reached an amicable settlement and compromised the case, and that the accused family having paid an amount of Rs. 40,000 to the heirs of the deceased as compensation. It was urged by the learned counsel for the parties that in view of the observation of this Court in Muhammad Bashir v. The State (P L D 1982 S C 139) and Asghar Ali v. The State (1982 S C M R 1026) the compromise may be treated as a mitigating circumstance for reduction in sentence of the petitioner.

3. Having satisfied ourselves that the parties have compromised they matter and the compensation having been paid to the heirs of the deceased we convert this petition into appeal and allow the same partly. In view of the observation of this Court in the above noted cases the petitioner's sentence of death is reduced to that of imprisonment for life. The sentence, of fine is set aside in view of the cash compensation paid by the accused party to the heirs of the deceased. The petitioner shall also be given the benefit of the provisions of section 382‑B., Cr. P.C. Appeal partly allowed.