KHALILUR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.--- Muhammad Ashraf, Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Abbas were tried for the murder of one Ahmad alias Ahmah, by the learned Sessions Judge of Okara who-vide his judgment, dated 8-4-1990 acquitted Aslam and Abbas but found Ashraf guilty of the said charge and after convicting him under section 302, P.P.C. Punished him with death alongwith a fine of Rs.5,000 or sufferance of two years' R.I.-in default thereof. The entire amount of fine was directed to be paid to the heirs of the deceased, as compensation.
2. Murder Reference No.81 of 1990 seeks confirmation of the sentence of death imposed on Ashraf convict who in turn challenges the above-said conviction and sentences through Criminal Appeal No.217 of 1990.
3. During the pendency of these two matters before this Court, an application bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No.1 of 1991 was submitted stating therein that the parties had entered into a compromise and further that the complainant party had even received Khoon Baha in lieu thereof.
4. The heirs of Ahmad deceased were directed to be produced before this Court in support of the plea of compromise and consequently Noor-ul---Hassan, a son of Ahmad deceased who is stated to be the only heir of the said deceased is present, in person. He is, however, accompanied by Muhammad Saeed, a real brother of the deceased and' Riaz who is, a nephew of the deceased and who was the complainant of the present case.
S. The statements of all these three persons have been separately recorded.
6. Since the, parties have entered into a compromise we consider if inappropriate to keep the disposal of the present matters pending only to await the printing of the record.
7. Therefore, we dispense with the printing of the said record and have decided to proceed with the disposal of the matters before us on the record as it is.
8. Although in the above-mentioned application bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No.1 of 1991, it had been submitted that a compromise had been reached between the parties after payment and receipt of Khoon Baha, yet it has been deposed through the affidavits filed alongwith the said p, application that the heirs of the deceased had granted AFW to Muhammad Ashraf appellant.
Similar is the position taken before us through the statement of Noor-ul-Hassan, the only son and the heir of the deceased which position has been verified by Muhammad Saeed and Riaz, the brother and nephew respectively of the deceased.
9. It appears that the learned counsel drafting the above-mentioned application had wrongly stated that the compromise had been reached between the parties after payment of Khoon Baha.
10. Be that as it may, it was submitted before this Court through the above-referred affidavits and it has been asserted before us through the statements recorded by us today, that Noor-ul-Hassan, the son and the only heir of the deceased had forgiven the appellant in the name of Allah and had B accordingly granted AFW to him. He has further prayed that Ashraf appellant be acquitted.
11. Nothing exists on record to punish the appellant by way of Tazeer despite the AFW granted to him by the Wali of the deceased.
12. Consequently, Criminal Appeal No.217 of 1990 is allowed; the impugned judgment, dated 8-4- 1990 of the learned Sessions Judge of Okara alongwith the conviction and the sentences recorded against Ashraf appellant are set aside and the said appellant is acquitted of the charge of which he was convicted, on account of the above-noticed AFW granted to him, as envisaged by the provisions of section 345 of the Cr.P.C. He shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case.
13. Murder Reference No.81 of 1990 is answered in the above terms.