Manzoor Ahmad Malik, J.--This judgment shall partly dispose of Crl. A. No, 1477/2011 (Irfan vs. The State) and answer Murder Reference No, 362/2011 sent by the learned trial Court for confirmation of the sentence of death of Irfan appellant or otherwise, as both these matters have arisen out of the same judgment dated 29.7.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi Bahauddin, whereby, after having tried Irfan appellant and his two co-accused, namely, Sultan Ahmad and Muhammad Nazir, for the murder of Kaleem Azam deceased and for causing injuries on the person of Mazhar Iqbal (injured-PW), Irfan appellant was convicted under Section 302(b), PPC, for the murder of Kaleem Azam deceased, and sentenced to death as Tazir with a further direction to pay a compensation of Rs, 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) to the legal heirs of the said deceased as provided under Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. in default whereof to further undergo SI for six months. The appellant was also convicted under Section 324, PPC for firing at Mazhar Iqbal (injured-PW) and sentenced to ten years RI with a fine of Rs, 25,000/- in default whereof to further undergo SI for three months. The appellant was also convicted under Section 337-L(1), PPC for causing fire-arm injuries on the person of Mazhar Iqbal(injured-PW) and sentenced to seven years RI with a direction to pay a Daman of Rs, 50,000/- to the said Mazhar lqbal (injured-PW) and in its default he was directed to suffer three months SI. The sentences were directed to run concurrently and benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was extended to him. However, benefit of doubt was extended to two co-accused of the appellant, namely, Sultan and Muhammad Nazir and they were acquitted from the charges.
2. During pendency of the titled appeal, Crl. Misc. No, 2889M/2011 was filed on behalf of Irfan appellant for his acquittal on the basis of compromise, whereupon, report was called from the learned District & Sessions Judge, Mandi Bahauddin, regarding genuineness or otherwise of the compromise, who, vide Letter No, 4, dated 3.1.2012, has reported that Kaleem Azam deceased was unmarried at the time of occurrence, so, he left behind his parents, namely, Muhammad Azam (father) and Mst. Kaneez Bibi(mother) only. He has further reported that they (parents) have forgiven Irfan appellant in the Name of Almighty Allah from the murder charge of their son Kaleem Azam deceased, having no objection to his acquittal.
3. The learned Deputy Prosecutor General, who was handed over the whole file of the case for its minute scrutiny, has stated that he has gone through the report submitted by the learned District & Sessions Judge coupled with the statements of the legal heirs of Kaleem Azam deceased and other documents annexed therewith and is satisfied with its genuineness qua Irfan appellant's compromise with the legal heirs of Kaleem Azam deceased. However, he adds that Mazhar Iqbal (injured-PW) has not affected compromise with the appellant, therefore, this appeal to the extent of appellant's conviction under Sections 324/337-L(1), PPC shall remain alive.
4. Heard. After having gone through the report of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Mandi Bahauddin, and the statements annexed therewith it appears that the compromise has arrived at between the legal heirs of Kaleem Azam deceased for mutual harmony, rather, both the legal heirs of the deceased have stated in their respective statements that Irfan appellant was innocent and was not their accused. The learned DPG was specifically asked to assist this Court regarding genuineness of the compromise or otherwise arrived at between both the parties with specific reference to the report submitted by the learned District & Sessions Judge and the statements/documents annexed therewith. After having gone through the whole file, the learned DPG submits that the learned District & Sessions Judge has recorded statements of all the legal heirs of Kaleem Azam deceased and, as the compromise is complete in all respects between the appellant and legal heirs of Kaleem Azam deceased, therefore, the State has no objection to its acceptance to the said extent and consequent acquittal of Irfan appellant from the murder charge of Kaleem Azam deceased. This Court seems no reason not to accept the. compromise, as, from the report of the learned District & Sessions Judge and the documents annexed therewith, it appears that the same is genuine and without any coercion, duress, pressure, compulsion, deception or threat coupled with the fact that it is according to the settled principles of the superior Courts of the country including the learned Apex Court and even provisions of Section 311, PPC do not attract in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. It appears that both the parties have entered into compromise after having burried their cudgels to create mutual harmony, peace and tranquility, rather, legal heirs of Kaleem Azam deceased, who are his father and mother, respectively, have categorically stated in their respective statements that Irfan appellant was innocent and was not their accused. However, we are in agreement with the argument of the learned DPG that as Mazhar Iqbal (injured-PW) has not affected compromise with the appellant, therefore, this appeal to his extent shall remain alive. Resultantly, Crl. Misc. No, 2889- M/2011 seeking acquittal of the appellant on the basis of compromise between the legal heirs of Kaleem Azam deceased and Mazhar Iqbal (injured-PW) is allowed and while partly allowing the appeal in hand, the conviction and sentence awarded to Irfan appellant under Section 302(b), PPC, vide judgment dated 29.7.2011, for the murder of Kaleem Azam deceased, passed by the learned trial Court, is set-aside and the appellant is acquitted from the murder charge of Kaleem Azam deceased under Section 302(b), PPC. However, this appeal qua Irfan appellant's conviction and sentence under Sections 324 and 337-L(1), PPC for the injuries caused on the person of Mazhar Iqbal (injured PW) shall remain intact and shall be decided on merits on its own turn.
Death sentence is NOT CONFIRMED and Murder Reference is answered in the NEGATIVE.