Summary: (a) Qatl-i-amd—Afw (forgiveness) by heir—Effect on Tazir death—Fasād fil-arḍ threshold—Where an adult sane wali validly waives Qisās (Section 309 APC), the court’s residual power to award death under Tazir (Section 311 APC) survives only in exceptional cases meeting the doctrinal standard of fasād fil-arḍ (systemic/public disorder)—Absent such aggravation, overriding a lawful afw by imposing Tazir death is impermissible. Qur’anic scheme (Al-Baqarah 2:178; Al-Mā’idah 5:33) recognized; forgiveness is a divinely sanctioned concession and must be given legal effect. (b) Penal discretion under Section 311 APC—Contours—“Fasād fil-arḍ” requires conduct transcending private grievance and threatening public order (e.g., terror, serial violence, armed insurrection). Mere gravity of a single domestic homicide, without demonstrable societal destabilization, is insufficient to justify Tazir death once Qisās stands waived. (c) Statutory framework—Sections 302(a)–(c), 309, 311 APC—Mapped—(i) Qisās if not forgiven; (ii) Tazir (death or life) where Qisās not applicable; (iii) life imprisonment as Tazir where circumstances so warrant—Valid, unconditional afw by a wali extinguishes retributive death; exceptional Tazir death requires a reasoned finding of fasād fil-arḍ. (d) Proportionality and welfare considerations—Islamic criminal law emphasizes reconciliation and social welfare—Executing Tazir death in the present familial context would orphan minor children and offend proportionality; life impri

Summary: (a) Criminal Law ----Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302—Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 345(2) & (7) Compounding of offence—Resiling from compromise—Legal effect—Appellant, accused of murder under S. 302, PPC, entered into a compromise with the deceased’s legal heirs at the bail stage—Subsequently, heirs resiled from the compromise at trial—Trial court and High Court refused to accept the earlier compromise—Held, compounding of an offence under S. 302, PPC falls under S. 345(2), Cr.P.C., which requires court permission—A compromise at the bail stage does not automatically entitle the accused to acquittal if later withdrawn—As per S. 345(7), Cr.P.C., no offence can be compounded except as provided by law—The trial court must verify the legal heirs, record statements, and formally allow compounding—No valid compromise existed at trial; appeal dismissed. Cited Cases: • Muhammad Akram v. Abdul Waheed 2005 SCMR 1342 • Zahid Rehman v. The State PLD 2015 SC 77 • Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah v. Syed Sabir Hussain Shah 1998 SCMR 466 (b) Criminal Procedure ----Effect of compromise at bail stage—No automatic entitlement to acquittal Compromise at bail stage—Whether enforceable at trial—Appellant sought acquittal based on a compromise reached at the bail stage, arguing that once a compromise is acted upon, it cannot be resiled from—Held, S. 345(2), Cr.P.C. requires a trial court to allow compounding of an offence before it takes legal effect—A compromise at the bail stage does not bind the trial court unless reaffirmed by the legal heirs before the court—Trial court correctly rejected the compromise when the heirs withdrew consent—High Court’s decision upholding the rejection found legally sound—Appeal dismissed. Cited Cases: • Rana Awais v. S.H.O. Police Station People’s Colony 2001 P.Cr.L.J. 241 • Naurang Rai v. Kidar Nath 29 Cr.L.J. 1928 • State of U.P. v. Nanhey AIR 1968 Allahabad 394 (c) Islamic Criminal Law ----Waiver (Afw) under S. 309, PPC vs. Compounding (Sulh) under S. 310, PPC—Applicability Qisas and Ta’zir—Distinction—Appellant argued that waiver (Afw) under S. 309, PPC should be treated differently from compounding (Sulh) under S. 310, PPC—Held, S. 309 and S. 310, PPC apply only in cases of Qisas, which require either (i) a confession of guilt before the trial court or (ii) Tazkiya-tul-Shahood of prosecution witnesses—If these conditions are not met, the case remains one of Ta’zir and follows the procedural requirements of S. 345, Cr.P.C.—The trial court remains the competent authority to decide whether a valid waiver or compromise exists—In the present case, no valid waiver or compounding occurred under the law—Appeal dismissed. Cited Cases: • Zahid Rehman v. The State PLD 2015 SC 77