Applicant was minor within meaning of clause (a) read with (I) to section 299 PPC and as such was not liable to qisas as contemplated under clause (a) to section 306 PPC. In that event even if the applicant is found guilty of “Qatl-i-amd” he will be liable to diyat.


Whoever with the intention of causing death or with the intention of causing bodily injury to a person, by doing an act which in the ordinary course of nature is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that his act is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death, causes the death of such person, is said to commit qatl-i-amd.


Where a person by doing anything which he intends or knows to be likely to cause death, causes death of any person whose death he neither intends nor knows himself to be likely to cause, such an act committed by the offender shall be liable for qatl-i-amd.


Whoever commits qatl-i-amd shall subject to the provisions of this chapter, be–

  • punished with death as qisas

  • punished with death or imprisonment for life as Tazir having either of the forms specified in section 304 is not available or

  • punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to twenty five years (but shall not be less than ten years), where according to the injunctions of Islam the punishment of qisas is not applicable.

Provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to offence to qatl-i-amd if committed in the name or on the pretext of honour and the same shall fall within the ambit of clause (a) or clause(b) as the may be.

Conviction and sentence recorded against appellant. Challenge to. Appreciation of evidence. Defence version appears to be more plausible reasons for murder of their own girl at the hands of the appellants. Close relatives and friends of the main accused are also named in the occurrence by attributing different roles to them by widening the net. So that non should be left behind to prosecute version.

Prosecution version is disbelieved and conviction is based on defence version. The same has to be believed or rejected in to-to and it cannot be accepted in piece meal to suit the prosecution version.

Conviction and sentence of life imprisonment for offence of murder, assailed by appellants. Evidence on record unfolded two version. One narrated by prosecution and the other by defence.

Case is of single accused and in such cases substitution is rare phenomenon, however as per claim of prosecution occurrence had taken place at 7:00 a.m. matter as reported to police 9:20 a.m. and post mortem was conducted at 12:45 p.m. duration given by doctor between injury and death was 2/3 hours and between death and post mortem was within 24 hours. Which fact casts doubt on prosecution story regarding date and time of occurrence especially when rigormortis was fully and completely developed.

In original post-mortem report in column of death neither doctor had given date nor time which fact indicated that till preparation of the same neither FIR was registered nor time of death was available. Thus doubt is cast on prosecution version.

Medico legal report of injured witness was not brought on record. Doctor observed that at the time of post mortem examination. There was bandage on the wound of deceased and so many injections were given to him. Prosecution however failed to explain that from where those bandages were applied and who had given those injections such facts create doubt in prosecution story.

Dead body of deceased lady was found lying in the house of father of accused but there was no direct evidence on record to show or establish that house form where dead body was recovered was possessed or owned by father of accused. Place of occurrence was surrounded by inhabited houses and the same was situated in Chowk of the village. Occurrence dragging of deceased lady by appellant would go unwitnessed or unnoticed by other villagers. Admittedly, the day of occurrence was nikah ceremony day of on accused at Faisalabad. It is difficult to believe that appellant would commit such offence on the day of his nikah ceremony.

Facts were sufficient to doubt the credibility of prosecution case and appellants were entitled to get benefit of doubt.

Opinion of police was based on material collected during investigation. Police had showed innocence of accused with proper reasons. Exercise of power by trial court under such circumstances could not be declared as illegal by High Court in absence of any good reason High Court dismissed revision.

Identification it was borne out form occurrence culprit was having his face muffled and he could not be identified and his name was also not known to witnesses till preparation of inquest report. Ocular version had thus failed to establish to identify actuate culprit.


Whoever commits qatl,

  • under ikrah-i-tam shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to twenty five years but shall not be less than ten years and the person causing ikrah-i-tam shall be punished for the kind of qatl committed as a consequence of his ikrah-i-tam; or

  • under ikrah-i-naqis shall be punished for the kind of qatl committed by him and the person causing ikrah-i-naqis shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years.


  1. proof of qatl-i-amd liable to qisas shall be in any of the following forms, namely:–

  • the accused makes before a court competent to try the offence a voluntary and true confession of the commission of the offence or

  • by the evidence as provided in article 17 of the qanun-i-shahadat 1984.

  • the provisions of the sub-section 1 shall mutatis mutandis, aply to a hurt liable to qisas.


In case of qatl, the wali shall be;

  • the heir of the victim, according to his personal law; [but shall not include the accused or convicted in case of qatl-i-amd if committed in the name or on the pretext of honour] and

  • the government if there is no heir.


Qatl-i-amd shall not be liable to qisas in the following cases,

  • when an offender is a minor or insane:

provided that where a person liable to qisas associates with himself in the commission of the offence with a person not liable to qisas with the intention of saving himself from qisas, he shall not be exempted from qisas.

  • When an offender causes death of his child or grandchild, how low-so-ever; and

  • when any wali of the victim is a direct descendant, how low so ever of the offender.


Qisas for qatl-i-amd shall not be enforced in the following cases.

  • When the offender dies before the enforcement of qisas.

  • When any wali voluntarily and without duress, to the satisfaction of the court, waives the right of qisas under section 309 or compounds under section 310; and

  • when the right of qisas devolves on the offender as a result of the death of the wali of the victim, or on the person who has no right of qisas against the offender.

The satisfy itself that the wali has waived the right of qisas under section 309 or compounded the right of qisas under section 310 voluntarily and without duress the court shall take down the statement of the wali and such other persons as it may deem necessary on oath and record an opinion that it is satisfied that the waiver or as the case may be the composition was voluntary and not the result of any duress.


Whoever without any intention to cause the death of or cause harm to a person causes death of such person, either by mistake of act or by mistake of fact, is said to commit qatl-i-khata.


Whoever commits qatl-i-khata shall be liable to diyat,

provided that where qatl-i-khata is committed by any rash or negligent act, other than as or negligent driving, the offender may in addition to diyat, also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years as Tazir.


Whoever without any intention to cause death or, cause harm to, any person, does any unlawful act which becomes a cause for the death of another person, is said to commit qatl-bis-sabab.


An unlawfully digs a pit in the thoroughfare, but without any intention to cause the death of or harm to, any person. B while passing from there fails in it and is killed. Ahas committed qatl-bis-sabab.


Whoever commits qatl-bis-sabab shall be liable to diyat.

  • The court shall subject to the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah and keeping in view the financial position of convict and heirs of the victim, fix the value of diyat which shall not be less than the value of thirty thousand, six hundred and thirty grams of silver.

  • For the purposes of sub-section 1,

  • the Federal Government shall by notification in the official Gazette, declare the value of silver, on the first day of July each year or on such date as it may deem fit, which shall be the value payable during a finance year.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here