The case PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 1083 addresses an offense committed in the name of "honour killing." Despite the legal heirs of the deceased submitting a compromise in court, the accused’s bail application was rejected.
Key points from the judgment:
Exclusion from 'Qatl-i-Amd': The offense of murder committed under the pretext of honour is explicitly excluded from the definition of ‘qatl-i-amd’ in Section 302(c) of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). This distinction is based on the 2016 Criminal Law Amendment, which classifies honour-based killings as premeditated due to their motive of "honour."
Irrelevance of Compromise in Honour Killing Cases: According to sub-section (7) of Section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC), an offense committed on the pretext of honour cannot be waived or compounded unless explicitly allowed by the law. The amendment to Section 299 of PPC has introduced clause (ee), categorizing honour killings as ‘fasad-fil-arz’ (mischief on earth), which implies heightened severity and restricts the applicability of forgiveness or compromise.
Mandatory Life Imprisonment for Honour Killings: Section 311 of PPC states that even if the right of qisas (retribution) is waived by the victim’s heirs, the court is authorized to impose severe punishments, such as life imprisonment, under the concept of fasad-fil-arz. Furthermore, for honour killings, the proviso to this section mandates a life sentence regardless of any forgiveness or compromise reached.
Impact on Bail: Given the amendments to sections 299(ee), 302(c), 311 PPC, and sections 345(2-A) and 345(7) Cr.PC, a compromise does not entitle an accused in an honour killing case to bail. The court, therefore, rejected the bail application in Crl. Misc. 47663/24 (Bilal Sikandar Vs The State), reinforcing that honour killings are non-compoundable and punishable by mandatory imprisonment for life despite any pardon from the victim’s family.