JUDGMENT M.A. ZAFAR, J.- Muhammad Arshad, Muhammad Yahya @ Amjad, Aamir Sohail and Kashif Sohail present respondents were involved in case FIR No. 126 dated 16.3.1990 registered with Police Station Bani, district Rawalpindi u/ss. 302, 307, 109, 34, PPC. They were tried by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi, who vide judgment dated 4.1.1994 acquitted them from the charge.
2. Feeling aggrieved from the judgment passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi acquitting the respondents, State filed and present appeal against acquittal of Muhammad Arshad and Muhammad Yahya, whereas complainant filed criminal revision petition No. 24-1994 against all the four accused, who were acquitted by the learned Trial Court. During the .Pendency of aforesaid matters in this Court Muhammad Yahya accused/respondent expired on 20.9.1994 and to his extent criminal appeal was abated.
3. Another learned Division Bench of this- Court vide judgment dated 5.12.2006 accepted the appeal filed by the State and convicted and sentenced Muhammad Arshad accused respondent u/s. 302(b)/34, PPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life with the benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C, with further direction to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased and in default thereof to further undergo six months' S.I. The said Muhammad Arshad was also convicted u/s. 324/34, PPC for causing injuries to ljaz and sentenced to seven years' R.I.
With a fine of Rs. 50,000/- or in default thereof to further undergo six months' R1. However, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. As a consequence of decision in the present appeal, criminal revision No. 24-1994 filed by the complainant was dismissed as having become infructuous to the extent of Muhammad Arshad -and Muhammad Yahya accused and the same was also dismissed to the extent of Aamir Sohail and Kashif Sohail accused/respondents.
4. Feeling aggrieved from the judgment passed by this Court Muhammad Arshad filed Crl. Appeal No. 3/07 challenging his conviction and sentence whereas Mushkoor Ahmad complainant filed Crl.
Appeal No. 877/06 seeking enhancement of sentence of Muhammad Arshad before the apex Court. Both the matters came up for hearing before the apex Court and vide judgment dated 15.2.2007 the impugned judgment passed by this Court on 5.12.2006 was set aside with the direction to decide the present appeal afresh and during the pendency of the appeal Muhammad'
Arshad respondent was directed to be released on bail subject to his -furnishing surety bonds of Rs. 50,000/- with P.R. In the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. , 5.After the remand order passed by the apex Court, both the matters i.e. Present appeal and Crl.
Revision No. 24/1994 are pending adjudication in this Court.
Muhammad Arshad Sheikh respondent No. 1 filed an application (Crl. Misc. No. 372-M of 2007) u/s. 345, Cr.P.C, read with Section 561-A, Cr.PC, for giving effect to compromise arrived at between the parties in the above-said case by this Court, copy of which alongwith allied documents was. Sent to the learned Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi for genuineness and verification of the compromise and in this regard report dated 25.9.2007 was submitted by learned Sessions, Judge , Rawalpindi, which is as under:- "After going through the statements of the legal heirs "of the deceased Muhammad Mushtaq I am satisfied that the compromise is genuine. However, it is. Also respectfully submitted that Mst.
Naseem the widow and Mst. Sumatra the daughter of Pervaiz Akhtar brother of the deceased, who died after his death, have not appeared before this Court as they are residing abroad and their whereabouts are not known.. So there is no compromise on their behalf. "
6. In compliance to the order of this Court dated . 8.10.2008 another report dated 21.10.2008 was submitted by learned Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi, which reads as under:- "In respectful compliance of the above-said order, the statement of Muhammad Altaf Chaudhry, the attorney of Mst. Sumaira Akhtar Chaudhry has been recorded where he stated that he is the.
Real paternal uncle of Sumaira Akhtar Chaudhry, who is real daughter of his brother namely, Pervaiz Akhtar Chaudhary; that Sumaira Akhtar Chaudhary is residing at London, who has appointed him as attorney vide written power-of- attorney dated 25.3.2008 duly registered with Sub- Registrar, Rawalpindi on 21.8.2008; that she has authorized him to enter into compromise with the petitioner/convict and to make a statement on her behalf, that while authorizing him. Mst.
Sumaira Akhtar, Chaudhry has no objection to the compromise and acquittal of the petitioner/accused. He further stated that in the capacity of attorney of Mst. Sumaira Akhtar Chaudhry he waived the right of Qisas and Diyat in the name of Almighty God and has no objection if the petitioner/convict is acquitted in this case."
7. In this view, of the matter, since the parties have entered into a compromise, no further action is required and the appeal filed by the State challenging the acquittal of Muhammad Arshad respondent/accused is consigned to record and accordingly disposed of. Bail bonds submitted by Muhammad Arshad respondent No. 1 in pursuance of the order dated 15.2.2007 passed by the apex Court is discharged.