2001 P Cr (PLP)

S. 345

Compounding of offence

Offence can be compounded between a Muslim end non-Muslim and even between non-Muslims inter se-- Section 345, Cr.P.C. under which compounding of offence is regulated does not provide for any competence or otherwise of a person entering into a compromise, nor does it restrict a Muslim or a. non-Muslim from entering into such compromise

Only qualification for entertaining such application is the compound ability of the offence and nothing more. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

S. 345

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.320

Compounding of offence between a Muslim and non-Muslims

Accused was a Muslim and the legal heirs of the deceased were non-Muslims who had given affidavits whereby they had compounded the offence forgiving the accused and foregoing the -Qisas and Diyat

Objection raised by prosecution was that since parties were Muslims and non-Muslims no compromise could be effected between them-- Validity

Compound ability of the offence was the only qualification under 5.345, Cr.P.C. for entertaining the application of compromise and it did not restrict a Muslim or a non-Muslim from entering into a compromise-- Compounding of offence, therefore, could be effected between a Muslim and non-Muslim and even between non-Muslims inter se

Compromise between the parties was consequently accepted and the accused was acquitted accordingly. Allah Bachayo Soomro for Appellant. Ali Azhar Tunio, Asstt. A.-G. for the State. All the applications are for the permission to compound and for acceptance of the compromise affected between the accused persons and the legal heirs of the deceased. The only short controversy raised in the instant matter on behalf of State is that accused/appellant is Muslim, whereas deceased and his legal heirs are non-Muslims, no such compromise can be recorded. The compounding of offence is regulated under section 345, Cr.P.C. it does not provide for any competence or otherwise of a person entering into a compromise nor does it restrict a Muslim or a non-Muslim from entering into such compromise. The only qualification for entertaining such application is the compound ability of the offence and in this case the offence for which appellants were charged and sentenced is under section 320, P.P:C. They were convicted to undergo R.I. for five years and to pay Diyat amount equivalent to the value of 30630 grams of silver amounting to Rs.3,06,

300. All the legal heirs of the deceased have given their respective affidavits whereby they have compounded the offence and B expressed their desire to forgive the appellant. Section 320, P.P.C. is mentioned in the second column of the table wherein compoundable offences are listed and it is so provided that the offence falling under section 320 may with the permission of the Court before which any prosecution for such offence is pending be compounded by the person. mentioned in the third column of the table and in the instant case father Manik and Shrimati Ilmai the mother of the deceased have given their respective affidavits to forego the Qisas and Diyat. There is no other restriction in the provision of 345, Cr.P.C. or qualification attached as to person between whom tht compounding can be affected, therefore, I am of the view that compounding C of the offence can be affected between a Muslim and non-Muslims and even between non-Muslims inter se. The applications are in order duly supporter: by respective affidavits of exoneration. The permission to compromise is granted and compromise is accepted as required under section 345(6), Cr.P.C. Resultantly the appellant is to be released forthwith in not required in any other case. All the applications stand disposed of. N.H.Q./A-94/K Appeal accepted.