' Through the instant constitutional petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner has made the following prayer:-- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that while accepting the instant petition the respondents be directed to release the petitioner forthwith while extending the benefit of Presidential Order dated 13.12.2001 since the petitioner has already undergone the sentence and if the said period of imprisonment is still incomplete then the petitioner be released after the completion of the said period.
' Any other relief which the petitioner is found entitled may also be granted."
2. Facts of the case succinctly required for determination of the petition in hand are that the petitioner was booked in case FIR No.196/98, dated 16.08.1998, offence under Sections 302, 324, 427, 436, 34, P.P.C., read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, Police Station Shera Kot, Lahore.
During the course of investigation he was found guilty as such his name was placed in column No.3 of the report prepared under Section 173, Cr.P.C. Submitted before the learned Special Court constituted under the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. After submission of challan, the learned trial court seized the matter in terms of judgment dated 13.02.1999, convicted and sentenced the petitioners as under:-- Under Section 302(b), P.P.C., sentenced to death on six counts with direction to pay Rs.3,00,000/- and in case of default in payment thereof to undergo R.I. For two years.
' Under Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, sentenced to death.
' Under Section 436, P.P.C., sentenced to undergo R.I. For ten years with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in case of default in payment thereof to further undergo S.I. For six months.
' Under Section 427. P.P.C., sentenced to undergo R.I. For two years with fine of Rs.20,000/- and in case of default in payment thereof to further undergo S.I. For six months.
' Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr. P. C. Was also extended in favor of the petitioner."
' Being aggrieved with the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned trial court, the petitioner assailed the judgment through filing Crl. Appeal No.117/1999 while the learned trial court forwarded Murder Reference No.12-T/1999 for confirmation of sentence of death or otherwise inflicted upon the petitioner. Learned Division Bench of this Court vide consolidated judgment dated 10.10.2001, dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner while the Murder Reference No.12- T/1999 was answered in the affirmative. Against the judgment of this Court the petitioner filed Crl.
Appeal No.260/2002 before august Supreme Court of Pakistan, which was also dismissed by the apex Court vide judgment dated 09.05.2007. Subsequently he filed Crl. Review Petition No.33/2007, which was disposed off vide order dated 30.09.2009 in the following terms:- "3. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of as not pressed, Needless to above if an application for compounding the offence is made before the learned trial Court, it shall proceed with the same and decide in accordance with the law laid down by this Court in the judgment referred to above."
' In view of observations of august Supreme Court of Pakistan, the petitioner moved an application before the learned Anti-Terrorism Court No.II, Lahore, for effecting compromise, which was disposed off in the following terms:-- "8. As all the legal heirs of deceased persons have compounded the offence under Section 302, P.P.C. With the convict Faiz Rasool on their behalf as well as on behalf of minors voluntarily without any duress or coercion and have waived their right of Qisas and did not claim Diyat, minors were entitled to get the share of Diyat and their respective shares have already been invested in Govt.
Scheme of Defence Saving Certificate with National Saving Centre Sunt Nagar, Lahore, which would be paid to them on their attaining majority, therefore, while according the permission legal heirs are allowed to compound the offence under Section 302, P.P.C. With Faiz Rasool and he is acquitted of this charge under Section 302, P. P, C. Whereas with regard to offence under Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, this petition stands dismissed."
' The above order is under challenge through the instant petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that at the time of alleged occurrence the petitioner was minor, which is fully established from the birth certificate. Moreover, at the time of recording his statement under Section 342, Cr.P.C. The learned trial court had mentioned age of the petitioner as 17 years, therefore, his case is covered under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000. Learned counsel vehemently contends that in view of Presidential Order dated 13th December 2001 issued under Article 45 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the sentence of death inflicted upon the petitioner under the provisions of Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, is not maintainable. It is vehemently argued that the legal heirs of the deceased have affected compromise with the petitioner and he was, also acquitted of the charge by the learned trial court to the extent of offence under Section 302, P.P.C. Learned counsel seeks indulgence of the. Court in the circumstances.
4. Learned Assistant Advocate General supports the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner.
5. Perusal of record available on file reveals that the conviction and sentence inflicted upon the petitioner by the learned trial court by virtue of judgment dated 13.02.1999 was not only maintained by this Court rather it was upheld by august Supreme Court of Pakistan. However, his Crl. Review Petition No.33/2007 was disposed of with the permission to file application before the learned trial court to compound the offence, which was filed and the learned trial court after recording statements of legal heirs of the deceased and adopting all codal/legal formalities opined that the parties have entered into a genuine compromise as a consequence whereof he was acquitted of the charge under Section 302, P.P.C.
6. Today, during the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner referred the contents of Presidential Order dated 13th December, 2001, according to which special remission has been granted to the juveniles in the following terms:- "a. The death sentence of those condemned prisoners who were juveniles as defined in the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 at the time of commission of offence stands commuted to life imprisonment provided that the death sentence has been awarded under Ta'zir and not Qisas or under other Hadood Laws."
' The above presidential order was further supplemented by another letter No . F. S/41/2001-Pres .
Dated 18th June, 2002, issued by the Ministry of Interior; wherein classification of sentence under Ta'zir and sentence under Hadd was clarified and it was elucidated that the Presidential Order shall not apply to the cases where Hadd has been promulgated in case of murder or in case of Hudood and if the sentence is in pursuance of Ta'zir, the convict would be entitled for the relief as mentioned in the Presidential Order.
7. This Court is conscious of the fact that there is no concept of compromise, as far as, cases covered under the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, are concerned particularly when it has been affected at a belated stage but still we are of the view that as the petitioner is entitled for the relief in view of Presidential Order dated 13th December, 2001, being juvenile and the remissions granted by virtue of Presidential Order are fully applicable. Moreover, compromise between the parties is relevant as it would imprint beneficial effects in the relations between the parties and shall promote peace, tranquility and harmony, between the families of the petitioner and the complainant who admittedly are residents of the same vicinity. Respectful reliance in this regard is placed on the ratio decidendi of august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of Muhammad Bashir v. The State (1985 SCM R 81), Lal Din alias Lalu v. The State (1987 SCM R 855), Piran Ditta alias Peero and others v.
The State (1988 SCM R 415), Atta Muhammad v. Ghulam Muhammad (1988 SCM R 1592) and Shakeel and 5 others v. The State (PLD 2010 Supreme Court 47).
' In the case of Atta Muhammad v. Ghulam Muhammad (1988 SCM R 1592) the august Court has laid down the following principle : -- "---S. 302/34--Accused a young person of 17 years of age at time of occurrence and remained in jail for 13 years, out of which he was lodged in death cell for 11 years---Heirs of deceased entered into compromise---Sentence of death substituted with sentence of imprisonment for life in interest of justice.
8. While seeking guidance from the judgments of the Apex Court referred to above, we have been persuaded to hold that to meet the ends of justice; it would be justified if sentence of death inflicted, upon the petitioner under section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 is converted into imprisonment for life. All the, sentences inflicted upon the petitioner are directed to run concurrently and benefit of diction 382-B, Cr.P.C. Is also extended in favor of the petitioner.
9. The instant constitutional petition succeeds in the above terms.