IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Cr. Jail Appeal No. S-12 of 2014

Applicants:                                   Gul @ Gulsher s/o Mohammad                                                    Ramzan Labano,

                                           Through Mr. Noor Muhammad                                               Memon, Advocate

The State:                           Through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro,                                                    Additional Prosecutor General.

Date of hearing:                  06-02-2023

Date of order:                      06-02-2023

J U D G M E N T

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J. Through this criminal jail appeal, the appellant has impugned the judgment dated 13.02.2014, passed by the learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur in Sessions Case No.311/2009, re: State V/S Gul alias Gulsher Labano, punishable under Section 302 P.P.C, culminating from Crime No. 49/2009 of P.S. Lakhi Ghulam Shah, whereby the appellant has been convicted U/S 302(b) P.P.C to suffer R.I for life imprisonment and to pay fine/Diyat amount of Rs.50,000/- to the legal heirs of deceased. In case of default in payment of fine/Diyat amount, he shall suffer S.I for six months more.

2. During pendency of the criminal jail appeal, the legal heirs of deceased and advocate of the appellant filed applications under section 345(4), Cr.P.C 345(5) Cr.P.C, and 345(6) Cr.P.C along with affidavits of the complainant and other legal heirs.

3. The compromise applications were sent to learned trial court i.e II-Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur for enquiry as to the legal heirs of the deceased as well as genuineness or otherwise of compromise between the parties vide order dated 23.01.2023.

4. In compliance of order dated 23.01.2023, learned II-Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, after completing all the required legal formalities submitted his report dated 30.01.2023. The trial court in order to ascertain the legal heirs of deceased Mst. Hanifa, called the reports from Mukhtiarkar (Revenue), Taluka Lakhi Ghulam Shah and S.H.O P.S. Lakhi Ghulam Shah.

5. In his report, the trial court has submitted that as per report of S.H.O P.S. Lakhi Ghulam Shah, the father of deceased Mst. Hanifan, namely, Atta Muhammad (the complainant) had expired on 11.05.2022 and mother of deceased Mst. Hanifan, namely, Mst. Basran Khatoon had also expired about 8/9 years ago.

6. Trial court further submitted that one of the legal heir namely Muhammad Usman did not produce his CNIC and produced P.S copy of token of CNIC, whereas, at the time of submitting compromise application, name of one legal heir was given as Mst. Jeewni and legal heir namely Mst. Farzana disclosed that Mst. Jeewni was also her nickname and in this regard FRC (Family Registration Certificate) of deceased Mst. Hanifan was called from NADRA authorities, wherein, Mst. Farzana was shown as one of her legal heirs, whereas, name of another legal heir namely Mst. Baseena was not mentioned in FRC.

7. Trial court further submitted that statements of legal heirs of deceased Mst. Hanifan namely, Ali Sher (Son), Roshan Ali (Son), Ahsan (Son), Yaseen (Son), Muhammad Usman (Son), Muhammad Ali (Son), Mst. Baseena (daughter), Mst. Naziran (daughter), Mst. Farzana @ Jeewni (daughter) and Mst. Reshma (daughter) were recorded wherein, they had stated that they had entered into compromise with accused Gul Gulsher S/O Muhammad Ramzan Labano on the intervention of Nekmards on Holy Quran and they had pardoned him without any compensation, Qisas and Arsh in the name of Almighty Allah and raised no objection for his acquittal. Per them, the compromise between them was without any fear or pressure and they had buried their differences forever and they want to live with peace and harmony. In this view of the matter, the compromise between the parties is genuine.

8. During the process of said inquiry no any person appeared before the trial court to file objections in respect of names of legal heirs of deceased Mst. Hanifa Labano.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that all the legal heirs of the deceased are now major and they have waived their right of "Diyat" and have excused the appellant with their free-will and consent without any inducement or pressure and compromise arrived at between the parties, is genuine. He has prayed for acquittal of the appellant/accused.

10. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General for the State has raised no objection to the compromise applications of the appellants, in view of the report submitted by II-Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, which in his view meets all necessary legal requirements in order to give effect to the compromise agreement.

11. 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.

12. On 12.07.2021 all the legal heirs of the deceased appeared before this court. They submitted that they have forgiven the accused Gul @ Gulsher Labano in the name of Almight Allah by waiving their right of "Diyat" and have no objection if the compromise be accepted. One legal heir, namely, Muhammad Usman was minor at that time. Today he appeared in court and submitted that he is now major and is not claiming any amount of Diyat etc and has no objection if the compromise be accepted and the appellant be acquitted.

13. Record reflects that Trial Court has recorded the statements of all 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 waived off right of "Diyat" against present accused and they have no objection if the appellant/accused Gul @ Gulsher Labano be acquitted.

14. 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 and the offence for which the appellant was tried and convicted is compoundable. The compromise arrived between the parties on the very face of it appears to be genuine and true, without any due inducement or pressure. Considering genuineness of the compromise, I feel no hesitation to accept the same as the offence punishable under Section 302 PPC against the appellants is compoundable,

15. In view of above position and the fact that the offence is compoundable; permission to compound the offence is granted by allowing application U/S 345(5) Cr.P.C. Consequently, the application U/S 345(6) Cr.P.C is also allowed. The appellant Gul @ Gulsher Labano is hereby acquitted of the charge in Sessions Case No. 311/2009, FIR No. 49/2009 of P.S. Lakhi Ghulam Shah, under Section 302 P.P.C. by way of compromise. He shall be released forthwith if not required in any other custody case.

16. In above terms, the Criminal Appeal stands disposed of. 

   J U D G E

Abdul Salam/P.A