2004 PLP 1890 (YLR)

Ch. Muhammad Farid‑ul‑Hassan for the Complainant. Ch. Ashfaq Ahmad for the State. Date of hearing: 15th July, 2003. MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM- UZ‑ZAMAN, J.‑‑‑Appellant Muhammad Yaseen alongwith Ali Ahmad Sabir was tried in a private complaint titled Muhammad Yar v. Muhammad Yaseen, etc. filed under section 302/34, P.P.C., by the Additional Sessions Judge, Depalpur, who vide judgment dated 18‑1‑2003 convicted appellant under section 302/34, P.P.C. and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and to pay compensation amounting to rupees one lac to the legal heirs of Riaz alias Gaggi deceased as required under section 544‑A, Cr.P.C. or in default whereof to undergo six months' S.I. Benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. was also extended in favour of the appellant. Ali Ahmad Sabir accused was convicted under section 302(b)/34, P.P.C. and sentenced him to death and to pay compensation amounting to rupees one lac as required under section 544‑A, Cr.P.C. to the legal heirs of Riaz deceased or in default where of to undergo six months' S.I.

2. Challenging his conviction and sentence the appellant has filed Criminal Appeal No.136 of 2003 whereas the complainant has filed Crl. Rev. No.209 of 2003 seeking enhancement of sentence of Muhammad Yaseen. Both these matters are being disposed of together by this judgment.

3. During the pendency of the appeal, Muhammad Yar, complainant filed an application (Crl. Misc. No.785‑M of 2003) seeking permission to effect compromise with the legal heirs of the deceased. The matter was referred to the Sessions Judge, Okara to verify the genuineness of compromise arrived at between the parties after recording the evidence. In compliance thereof the Sessions Judge summoned list of legal heirs of Riaz deceased from S.H.O. Police Station, Mandi Ahmadabad according to which the deceased died issueless and left behind only two persons namely Muhammad Yar, (his father) and Mst. Nusrat Bibi (his widow) as his legal heirs. The learned Sessions Judge, recorded the statements of both the legal heirs. Reportedly, both of them have effected compromise with Muhammad Yaseen appellant and have forgiven him in the name of Allah Almighty without receiving any compensation with their free‑will and without any duress or coercion and they have no objection if Muhammad Yaseen appellant is acquitted from the charge of murder of Riaz. Thus being satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise the Sessions Judge, Okara submitted his report dated 11‑6‑2003.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the report and are satisfied that the compromise has been effected between the parties without ally external pressure and the same has been done out of their free‑will and consent. While taking into account all the above‑mentioned facts and circumstances of this case we feel inclined to accept Crl. Misc. No.785‑M of 2003 by allowing the compromise and are of the view that the same has been effected voluntarily and will bring peace and harmony in the society.

5. Resultantly, the instant appeal is accepted, the conviction and sentence of appellant Muhammad Yaseen is set aside and he is acquitted of the charges. The appellant who is in jail shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case. In the light of compromise arrived at between the parties Crl. Rev. 209 of 2003 seeking enhancement of sentence of appellant also stands dismissed as not pressed. H.B.T./M‑236/L Appeal accepted.