Muhammad Ashraf and others, the petitioners were tried under section 325/148/149, P.P.C. For causing injuries including grievous injury to Muhammad Hussain and Sher Zaman P.Ws. On the conclusion of the trial, they were convicted and sentenced to 2 years' R.I. Under section 148, P.P.C and to 2 years' R.I. Under section 325/149, P.P.C. And a fine of Rs.1,000, in default thereof 3 months' S.I.
Each under section 325/149, P.P.C. The appeal filed by them was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha on 1-6-1982 Feeling aggrieved thereby they filed Revision No.361 of 1982 in this Court which was dismissed on 20-2-1991. The petitioners have filed the present application for their acquittal on the basis of compromise arrived at between them and the injured P.Ws. After the decision of the revision.
2. When asked as to whether or not this Court can entertain this application after the final decision of the revision, the learned counsel relied on Zulfiqar Ali v. The State PLD 1984 Lah. 461, Manzoor Hussain v. The State 1984 P Cr. L J 1396 to contend that to secure the ends of justice this Court has vast powers to grant leave to compromise and acquit the accused/petitioners on the basis of compromise.
3. I have considered the matter carefully. I am afraid, after having become functus officio, more particularly when no lis is pending, this Court cannot grant leave to compromise the offence. The relevant provision of law may be reproduced advantageously:-- Section 3450. Cr.P.C."When the accused has been convicted and an appeal is pending, no composition for the offence shall be allowed without the leave of the Court before which the appeal is to be heard."
The words `when the accused has been convicted and an appeal is pending', used in section 345, Cr.P.C. Will show that the Court may grant leave to compromise during the pendency of the appeal/revision and not after its final decision. The case-law cited by the learned counsel relates to the provisions of section 382, Cr.P.C., which in view of the specific provisions of section 345, Cr.P.C., does not take the case of the petitioner any further.
Pursuant to the above discussion, the application is dismissed.