-In view thereof, when proposed compromise between legal heirs of deceased and appellant is likely to promote Realise of peace in locality/society as well as betterment of present and coming generations of parties and particularly when no element of Fisad-fil-Arz within meaning of Section 311, P.P.C-

 PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Lahore) 497

Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)--

----S. 302(b)--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--Qatl-e-amd--Compromise between appellant and legal heirs--Sessions Judge, Mianwali and statements of above said legat heirs of deceased, reflects that compromise between appellant and above said legal heirs is genuine and they have arrived at a compromise with their free will and without any duress or coercion--In view thereof, when proposed compromise between legal heirs of deceased and appellant is likely to promote Realise of peace in locality/society as well as betterment of present and coming generations of parties and particularly when no element of Fisad-fil-Arz within meaning of Section 311, P.P.C--has been found from facts and circumstances of case, then it is appropriate to grant permission leave for effecting compromise within meaning of Section 345(2)(5), Cr.P.C.--Held: It is trite of law that surviving legal heirs of a deceased are quite competent to effect compromise within meaning of Section 345, Cr.P.C. where conviction and sentence have been passed under Ta’zir--Permission leave for effecting compromise between appellant and legal heirs of deceased is granted by allowing application--Accordingly, appeal is also accepted.        

                                                                          [Pp. 500 & 501] A & B

PLD 2019 SC 461.

Mrs. Naila Mushtaq Dhoon, Advocate for Appellant.

Ms. Nuzhat Bashir, Deputy Prosecutor General and Mr. Haroon Rasheed, Deputy District Public Prosecutor for State.

Nemo for Complainant.

Date of hearing: 14.9.2020.

 PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Lahore) 497
Present: Farooq Haider, J.
Mian AHMAD--Appellant
Versus
STATE--Respondent
Crl. A. No. 835-J of 2016, heard on 14.9.2020.

Judgment

Instant criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 25.11.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Piplan/trial Court, whereby in case arising out of F.I.R. No. 122/2015 dated: 02.04.2015 registered under Sections: 302, 148, 149, 109, P.P.C. at Police Station: Kundian, District: Miamvali, the learned trial Court while acquitting co-accused persons namely Muhammad Ikram, Habibullah, Amjid Mehmood and Najibullah, convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:

Conviction	Sentence
Under Section 302(b), P.P.C.	Under Scctioti 302(b), PPC to “Imprisonment for Life” as Taz’ir (for committing Qatl-e-amd of Matiullah) with payment of compensation Rs. 2,00,000/- under Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. to the legal heirs of the deceased which was to be recovered as an arrear of land revenue and in default of payment of compensation thereof to further undergo S.I. for six months.

2. During pendency of the titled appeal, the convict/appellant filed Crl. Misc. No. 1 of 2020 under Section 345 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 seeking permission to compound the offence as the appellant/convict and legal heirs of Matiullah (deceased) have arrived at a compromise, whereupon the said petition along with annexures was sent to the learned Sessions Judge, Mianwali to ascertain the genuineness of the compromise between the parties, record statement of the legal heirs of the deceased and also to confirm that interest of the minor legal heirs, if any, was duly secured and safeguarded. In compliance thereof, learned Sessions Judge, Mianwali furnished his report received through Letter No. 162/A, dated: 11.08.2020 detailing therein that after obtaining reports from Tehsildar, Piplan and S.H.O. police station concerned, he came to the conclusion that Muhammad Bashir (father of deceased) had died prior to the occurrence whereas Mst. Musarrat Bibi (widow of deceased) had died after occurrence of this case and Matiullah (deceased of the case) has been survived by following legal heirs:

1.	Mst. Saidan Bibi	mother
2.	Muhammad Tabish	minor son
3.	Mst. Samreen Bibi	minor daughter
4.	Mst. Iqra Bibi	minor daughter
5.	Mst. Ayesha	minor daughter
6.	Rehmat Ullah	(father of Mst. Musarrat Bibi widow of the deceased)

Learned Sessions Judge also recorded the statements of Mst. Saidan (mother) and Rehmat Ullah (father of Mst. Musarrat Bibi widow of the deceased, who statedly died after the occurrence), wherein they stated in clear terms that they have effected compromise with the convict/ appellant and pardoned him in the name of Allah Almighty by waiving their right of Qisas and Diyat; they do not want to receive any Badl-e-Sulh and compensation and have no objection if the convict/appellant is acquitted.

3. So far as aforementioned minor legal heirs i.e. one son and three daughters of Matiullah (deceased of the case) and their interest is concerned, Mst. Saidan Bibi (mother of deceased/real paternal grandmother of the minors) appeared on behalf of the minors being natural guardian and made statement that she has also effected compromise on behalf of the minors; the aforementioned report further reflects that in order to safeguard interest of the minors, the convict/appellant purchased Defence Saving Certificates equivalent to their respective shares in Diyat amount i.e. Rs. 9,03,000/- in favour of minor son and Rs. 4,51,500/- in favour of each minor daughter and produced the original Defence Saving Certificates in the Court, which were handed over to Mst. Saidan Bibi (mother of deceased of the case/paternal grandmother of the minors) being natural guardian of the minors.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that compromise has been effected amongst the appellant/convict and legal heirs of Matiullah (deceased of the case) and in this regard, he by referring report submitted and statements recorded of legal heirs of the deceased by learned Sessions Judge, Mianwali, requests for acceptance of this appeal and acquittal of the appellant on the basis of compromise.

5. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General and learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor have in unison submitted that since offence under Section 302(b), P.P.C. is compoundable, therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, they have no objection on the acccancc of this appeal and acquittal of appellant/convict in this case on the basis of compromise.

6. Arguments heard. Record perused.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant and both learned Law Officers are not at variance for sanctioning the approval to the compromise reached between the appellant and legal heirs of Matiullah (deceased). Further perusal of the report of learned Sessions Judge, Mianwali and statements of above said legat heirs of the deceased, reflects that the compromise between the appellant and above said legal heirs is genuine and they have arrived at a compromise with their free will and without any duress or coercion. In view thereof, when the proposed compromise between legal heirs of the deceased and appellant is likely to promote the Realise of peace in the locality/society as well as betterment of present and coming generations of the parties and particularly when no element of Fisad-fil-Arz within the meaning of Section 311, P.P.C. has been found from the facts and circumstances of the case, then it is appropriate to grant permission/leave for effecting the compromise within the meaning of Section 345 (2) (5), Cr.P.C. It is trite of law that surviving legal heirs of a deceased are quite competent to effect compromise within the meaning of Section 345, Cr.P.C. where conviction and sentence have been passed under Ta‘zir. In this regard, guidance has been sought from the dictum laid down by the larger Bench of august Supreme Court of Pakistan in case titled as “Muhammad Yousaf versus The State etc.” (PLD 2019 Supreme Court 461). Hence, permission/leave for

effecting compromise between the appellant and legal heirs of the deceased is granted by allowing the application bearing Crl. Misc.
No. 01 of 2020. Accordingly, titled appeal bearing Crl. Appeal
No. 835/J/2016 is also accepted, as a result whereof, conviction recorded and sentence awarded to the appellant vide impugned judgment dated: 25.11.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Piplan, is hereby set-aside and Mian Ahmad (appellant/convict) is acquitted of the charge within the meaning of Section 345 (6), Cr.P.C. in case arising out of F.I.R. No. 122/2015 dated: 02.04.2015 registered under Sections: 302, 148, 149, 109, P.P.C. at Police Station; Kundian, District: Mianwali. Appellant shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case.

(A.A.K.)          Appeal allowed