Court Allows Compromise with Absconding Accused in Murder Case – PLD 2012 Sindh 35.
مفرور ملزمان سے بھی صلح ھو سکتی ھے۔
کیس کی کہانی:
عنوان: منظور احمد و دیگر بمقابلہ دوم ایڈیشنل سیشن جج گھوٹکی و دیگر
پس منظر:
یہ مقدمہ ایک قتل (قتل عمد) سے متعلق ہے، جس میں کئی ملزمان نامزد کیے گئے تھے۔ کچھ ملزمان عدالت میں پیش ہو گئے جبکہ چار ملزمان مفرور قرار پائے۔
صلح کی درخواست: مقتول کے قانونی ورثاء نے عدالت میں درخواست دائر کی کہ وہ تمام ملزمان (حاضر اور مفرور) سے صلح کرنا چاہتے ہیں اور انہیں معاف کر رہے ہیں۔
ٹرائل کورٹ کا فیصلہ:
عدالت نے صرف اُن ملزمان سے صلح کی اجازت دی جو پیش تھے، جبکہ چار مفرور ملزمان سے صلح کی اجازت رد کر دی۔ عدالت کا مؤقف تھا کہ جب تک وہ مفرور ملزمان عدالت میں پیش نہیں ہوں گے، اُن سے صلح ممکن نہیں۔
اعلیٰ عدالت کا فیصلہ:
سندھ ہائی کورٹ نے اس فیصلے کو کالعدم قرار دیتے ہوئے کہا کہ:
- جب ایک بار عدالت نے مقدمے کی سماعت شروع کر دی ہو تو پراسیکیوشن جاری تصور ہوتی ہے، چاہے کچھ ملزمان مفرور ہوں۔
- اسلامی قانون اور سیکشن 345(2) ضابطہ فوجداری کے تحت مقتول کے ورثاء کو حق حاصل ہے کہ وہ مفرور ملزمان سے بھی صلح کر سکتے ہیں۔
- معافی کے لیے ملزم کی موجودگی یا رضامندی ضروری نہیں، بلکہ مقتول کے ورثاء کی نیتِ درگزر کافی ہے۔
نتیجہ:
عدالت نے ٹرائل کورٹ کا فیصلہ مسترد کرتے ہوئے تمام ملزمان کو، خواہ وہ حاضر ہوں یا مفرور، دفعہ 345(6) کے تحت بری کر دیا اور یوں مکمل صلح کو تسلیم کر لیا۔
Must read judgement
Great judgment on compromise with absconding accused only single one.
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 345(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/147/148/149---Qatl-e-amd---Compounding of offence---Scope---Trial Court vide impugned order had granted permission to legal heirs of the deceased to compound the offence with the accused facing the trial and refused the same regarding the four co-accused on the ground of their being absconders---Contention of prosecution was that under S.345(2), Cr.P.C. compounding of offence could take place only when prosecution of such offence was pending and since the prosecution was not pending in respect of the four absconders, no compromise with them could be made---Held, criminal proceedings stood initiated the moment cognizance was taken by the Magistrate and, the matter was sent to the court competent to try the offence---Legal heirs of the deceased, therefore, could compound the offence even against the absconders---Spirit behind S. 345(2), Cr.P.C. is that of "Affwo" and "Derguzar"---Under Islamic Law there is no provision that in a case of compoundable offence the accused can be forgiven only when he agrees to being forgiven---Plea of prosecution that unless the absconders appear before the court offence could not be compounded was not correct---Legal heirs of the deceased in their application had specifically stated that they were seeking permission for compromise with the present accused as well as the absconding accused---Trial Court, thus, could not disallow the application against the absconders---Impugned order was consequently set aside and all the accused persons were acquitted under S.345(6), Cr.P.C. in the case---Revision petition was allowed accordingly.
Muhammad Nawaz v. the State 1998 MLD 1; Muhammad Irshad alias Shada v. The State 1997 SCMR 951; Azizullah and others v. Addl. Sessions Judge, Mora Criminal Revision Application No.69 of 2010; Muhammad Arshad alias Pappu v. Addl. Sessions Judge, Lahore and 3 others PLD 2003 SC 547; Ghulam Farid alias Farida v. The State PLD 2006 SC 53; Ismail Abdul Rahman v. Muhammad Sadiq and 3 others PLD 1990 Kar. 286 and Wharton's Law Lexicon by A,.S.Oppe, 14th Edn. (1976 Reprint) p.810 ref.
Wali Muhammad and 7 others v. The State and 2 others 2008 MLD 1123 dissented from.
(b) Words and phrases---
--"Prosecution"-Connotation.
Ismail Abdul Rahman v. Muhammad Sadiq and 3 others PLD 1990 Kar. 286 ref.
(c) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Art. 13-"Prosecution"-Meaning---Word "Prosecution" as occurring in Art.13 of the Constitution would mean initiation or starting of proceedings of criminal nature before a court of law or a judicial Tribunal in accordance with the .procedure prescribed in the statute which creates offence.
P L D 2012 Sindh 35
Before Shahid Anwar Bajwa and Muhammad Ali Mazhar, JJ
MANZOOR AHMED and another---Applicants
Versus
2ND ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, GHOTKI and another---Respondents
More judgements on topic
Compromise with absconders.
Fact that accused with whom compromise has been effected were absconders, was no bar to acceptance of compromise.
2018 PCrLJ Note 69
PLJ 2015 CRC 314
PLD 2012 SIND 35