IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA
Criminal Jail Appeal No. S-83 of 2013
Appellant: Muhammad Mithal Narejo, Through Mr. Ali Hassan M. Narejo,Advocate.
The State: Through Mr. Muhammad Noonari,
D.P.G for the State.
Date of hearing: 15-02-2021
Date of decision: 19-02-2021
J U D G M E N T
ZULFIQAR ALI SANGI, J.Through instant criminal appeal, the appellant Muhammad Mithal Narejo, has assailed the judgment dated 16.11.2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ratodero in Sessions Case No.412/2010, (re: State V/s Muhammad Mithal) culminated from Crime No.110/2010 of Police Station Naudero, for offence under Sections 302,109,201,34 P.P.C, whereby the trial court has convicted the appellant for the offence U/S 302(b) P.P.C and sentenced him U/s 265-H(ii) Cr.P.C as Ta'zir as the requirement of Article 17 of Qanun-e-Shahadat has not been fulfilled by the witnesses and sentenced him to life imprisonment for the commission of murder of deceased Mst. Umrah Khan (his sister) with common intention shared by absconding accused Ghulam Shabir and Mohammad Nawaz, who committed the murder of deceased Ghulam Nabi. The accused was also fined to the extent of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lac). In default of payment of fine he would was directed to undergo R.I for 6 months more. The amount of fine, if, recovered to be paid to the legal heirs of deceased Mst. Umrah Khatoon as compensation under section 544 Cr.P.C. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently and he was extended benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C
2. During pendency of the appeal, the appellants filed applications U/S 345(2) Cr.P.C, 345(4) Cr.P.C and 345(6) Cr.P.C along with affidavits of the legal heirs of the deceased however, subsequently on 02.11.2018, learned counsel for the applicant did not press the applications for compromise arrived between the parties. Again applications U/S 345(2) Cr.P.C, 345(4) Cr.P.C and 345(6) Cr.P.C were filedbut on 28.10.2019, he once again did not press all three applications stating that due to bonafide mistake name of one of the legal heir, namely, Mst. Bashiran, the second wife of deceased Ghulam Nabi was omitted from the list of legal heirs. On 14.12.2019, learned counsel for the appellant again filed applications U/S 345(2) Cr.P.C, 345(4) Cr.P.C and 345(6) Cr.P.C. Vide order dated 20.02.2020, this court sent these applications to the trial court to hold fresh inquiry with regard to the genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties and submit its report. The report from trial court dated 12.03.2020 has been received. The trial court in order to ascertain the legal heirs of deceased, called the reports from Mukhtiarkar (Revenue), Ratodero and the S.H.O Police Station Naudero and Chairman Municipal Committee. During the process of said inquiry no any person appeared beforethe trial court to file objections in respect of names of legal heirs of Mst. Umrah w/o Ghulam Nabi and Ghulam Nabi s/o Hadi Bux Narejo. Notice was also got published in daily "AwamiAwaz", Sukkur dated 09.03.2020 in this regard.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that Diyat amount of Rs.10,87,500/- in favour of two minor legal heirs of their deceased mother was deposited on 16.06.2017 in compliance of the order dated 16.06.2017 as well as ten buffaloes were given to them. First compromise applications were not pressed in compliance of the order dated 22.09.2017. Thereafter second compromise applications were filed. He further submits that apart from the Diyat, a plot was given to legal heirs of deceased Ghulam Nabi. Due to appearance of remaining legal heirs/widow of deceased Ghulam Nabi, the second compromise applications were not pressed on 28.10.2019 for filing the same afresh. Subsequently, third compromise applications were field on 18.12.2019 in compliance of the order dated 28.10.2019. He further submits that Diyatamount of Rs.14,32,000/- of the remaining five minor legal heirs of their deceased father was deposited on 11.01.2021 in compliance of the orders dated 29.06.2020 and 06.01.2021. He has therefore, prayed for acceptance of the compromise and for acquittal of the accused.
4. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General for the State has raised no objection to the compromise applications of the appellant, in view of the report submitted by trial court. According to him the report meets all necessary legal requirements in order to give effect to the compromise agreement.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned D.P.G for the State and have perused the record with their able assistance.
6. On 15.02.2021, legal heirs Ayaz Ali, Arif and Mst. Basheeran appeared before this court. They submitted that they have no objection, if, the compromise be accepted.
7. Record reflects that Trial Court has also recorded the statements of major legal heirs, who stated in their statements that they have entered into compromise with present accused and have pardoned and forgiven him in the name of Almighty Allah with their sweet and free will without any pressure, compulsion, coercion and promise. They have no objection, if, the appellant/accused is acquitted.
8. After considering all aspects of the case, I am of the view that the legal heirs of the deceased are competent to compound/compromise the offence with the appellant/accused. The compromise arrived between the parties on the very face of it appears to be genuine and true, without any due inducement or pressure.
9. Considering genuineness of the compromise, I feel no hesitation to accept the same as the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 PPC against the appellant are compoundable.
10. Keeping in view of the above facts the compromise arrived between the parties is hereby accepted. Consequently, appellant Muhammad Mithal Narejo is hereby acquitted under Section 345(6) Cr.P.C in Sessions Case No. 412/2010, arising out of FIR No.110/2010, under Sections 302, 109,201,34PPC of police station Naudero. The appellant be released forthwith, if, not required in any other custody case.
11. Additional Registrar of this court is directed to deposit the amount of Diyat, deposited by the appellant in some profitable scheme till the minor legal heirs of both the deceased attained their majority.
12. In above terms, the Criminal Appealstand disposed of.
JUDGE
S.Ashfaq/-