SARDAR MUHAMMAD DOGAR, J.--- A quarrel took place between the women-folk belonging to the families of Bashir Ahmad and Ghulam Hyder of Mauza Kotli Mansoo, at a distance of 7 miles from Police Station Kamoke, on 10-7-1983 at about sunset time. Muhammad Yaqub who was their neighbour went to the spot alongwith his brother Muhammad Yusuf. Many other persons had also gathered there. Fateh Muhammad armed with a carbine, Zulfiqar armed with a revolver, Iftikhar armed with a gun, and Riaz armed with a Sota entered the house of Bashir Ahmad. Zulfiqar enquired about the origin of the dispute. Muhammad Yusuf replied that he did not know and that he may ask the parties directly. Fateh Muhammad exorted Zulfiqar that Muhammad Yusuf was their enemy, he should be killed, whereupon, Zulfiqar fired a shot from his revolver which struck Muhammad Yusuf on the chest. He fell down. The accused ran away while firing.
The occurrence, apart from Muhammad Yaqub, was witnessed by Muhammad Arif, Muhammad Hussain, Muhammad Malik and Bashir Ahmad, Muhammad Yusuf died on the spot. .
2. For motive for the occurrence, it is stated in the F.I.R. That Bashir Ahmad had affixed an electric bulb outside his Verandah. Ghulam Hyder his neighbour had objected to that due to which quarrel started a day before the occurrence. The women-folk of both the houses quarrelled- on the day of occurrence as well.
The second motive for the occurrence mentioned therein is, that Ata Ullah brother-in-law of Fateh Muhammad was murdered. Muhammad Yusuf was an eye-witness in that case. He did not depose against the accused.'
3. All the accused except Fateh Muhammad, were arrested during the investigation. He (Fateh Muhammad) was not arrested on having been found innocent. However, the challan was submitted against all, though names of the three accused except Zulfiqar, were placed in column No.2.
4. They were tried by Sardar Ghulam Farid, Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala. Learned trial Judge vide judgment dated 30-9-1985 acquitted Fateh Muhammad, Riaz and Iftikhar but convicted Zulfiqar under section 302, P.P.C. And sentenced him- to imprisonment for life plus to pay a fine of Rs.5,000 in default whereof to undergo R.I. For 2 years. He was also directed to pay a sum of Rs.20,000 as compensation to the heirs of the deceased, in default whereof to suffer R.I. For one year.
5. Zulfiqar filed Criminal Appeal No.744 of 1985. Vide judgment, dated 13-12-1989 the conviction and sentences of the appellant were set aside. The case was sent back to the trial Judge for re-writing the judgment after recording statement of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. In accordance with law.
6. In the second round, Zulfiqar was tried by Mr. Fakhar-i-Hayat, Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala. Learned trial Judge vide judgment dated 13-3-1990 convicted him under section 302, P.P.C. And sentenced him to death plus to pay a fine of Rs .10,000 in default whereof to undergo R.I.
For 2 years. He was also directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000 as compensation to the heirs of the deceased, in default of payment of which to undergo R.I. For six months.
7. Learned trial Judge has made a reference for confirmation of death sentence. The conviction and sentences have also been challenged by Zulfiqar. Both the matters are being disposed of together.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant before opening the case stated that the parties had compromised. He produced heirs of the deceased, i.e. His brother, mother, widow and the only son.
Father of the deceased has already died.
9. All the heirs have stated that they have compromised and pardoned Zulfiqar appellant. They have all prayed for his acquittal.
10. It appears from the statements of heirs of the deceased that after the murder of Muhammad Yusuf, Iftikhar brother of appellant named as accused alongwith him, was done to death on 18-6- 1986 after he had returned home on his acquittal by the trial Judge.
Muhammad Nawaz another brother of Zulfiqar appellant was done to death on 10-10-1986. In the first case, Muhammad Yaqub complainant in this case and brother of the deceased, alongwith two sons of sister of the deceased and a brother of Yaqub's wife were challaned while in the second case two brothers of wife of the deceased (Muhammad Yusuf) alongwith 4 others were challaned.
The accused in both the cases have been acquitted. Muhammad Yaqub and his mother Mst.
Ghulam Fatima clearly stated that the acquittal resulted due to the compromise. The history given by both of them is by itself, a satisfactory explanation, about genuineness of the compromise.
In view of the circumstances, enumerated above, it appears that heirs of Muhammad Yusuf deceased have waived their right of Qisas. Compounding of the offence under section 302, P.P.C. Is permitted under section 345(2), Cr.P.C. Per amendments enforced through the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, 1990. The appeal is, therefore, allowed in terms of the compromise and the appellant is acquitted. He shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case.
Death sentence is not confirmed.