' Petitioner seeks cancellation of to the respondents namely Muhammad Irshad Hussain and Abid Hussain by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffargarh in case F.I.R. No,154 of 1996, dated 3-8- 1996 registered under section 302/109/34, P.P.C. At Police Station Rohilanwali, District Muzaffargarh.
2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will not press this petition to the extent of Abid Hussain, respondent.
' In the light of statement made above, this petition stands dismissed to the extent of Abid Hussain, respondent.
3. Precise allegation against the respondent namely Muhammad Irshad Hussain is that on 3-8- 1996 at about 6-30 a.m., he being armed wtih pistol along with his other co-accused namely Abid Hussain being armed with pistol launched murderous assault upon Riaz Hussain, deceased, their real father. Abid gave butt blow on the head of Riaz Hussain whereas respondent Irshad Hussain fired at his father namely Riaz Hussain which hit him on his left shoulder and due to this injury, Riaz Hussain expired at the spot.
4. The respondent was granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,Muzaffargarh on 17-1- 1998 mainly on the ground that one widow of the deceased namely Mst. Muryam, his son namely Altaf and two daughters namely Shaheen and Nasreen have submitted their affidavits before the Court that they have forgiven the respondent namely Irshad Hussain and that more than 1-1/2 years have elapsed but challan has not been submitted, thus, keeping in view these circumstances, learned trial Court granted the bail to the respondent.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned trial Court while granting bail to the respondent had ignored the factual aspects of this case and a partial compromise has got no legal sanctity and no benefit can be extended to the accused even at bail stage.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that uptil today, challan has not yet been submitted and that it is the right of every accused that he should be given speedy trial but unfortunately same has been denied to the respondent. Further submits that learned trial Court has rightly exercised the discretion of bail in the light of compromise which was effected between the legal heirs and the respondent, thus, finally argues that even at bail stage, partial compromise can be taken into consideration for grant of bail.
7. I have heard arguments advanced by both the counsel for the parties and gone through the record of instant case minutely.
8. It is case of promptly lodged F.I.R. In which respondent is named and specific role of causing fire- arm injury on the person of Riaz Hussain (real father of the respondent) has been attributed to him.
Admittedly Riaz Hussain (deceased) had three wives, Mst. Muryum, Mst. Munawar and Mst. Zubaida Khanum (the petitioner) and out of these three widows respondent has compromised alongwith her three children whereas rest of two widows and their children have not made any compromise.
It is settled proposition of law that composition of offence under section 302, P.P.C. Is made permissible if all the legal heirs of the deceased have consented. Reliance is based on "Sh.
Muhammad Aslam and another v. Shokat Ali Shauka and others 1997 SCM R 1307.
Since all the legal heirs have not forgiven the respondent, no benefit of partial compromise can be given to him, even at bail stage. The exercise of discretion in favour of the respondent by learned Additional Sessions Judge is not sustainable in the eye of law. Accordingly, to the respondent vide order, dated 17-1-1998 is withdrawn.