Suo Moto Case No. 3 of 2017 (Pakistan)

The case involved a murder charge, for which the appellant was convicted and sentenced to death. During the pendency of the appeal, an application for acquittal was filed on the basis of a compromise. The appellate court held that the appellant should be acquitted, stating that when the legal heirs compounded the offense, they elected not to seek retribution or the enforcement of the sentence. The appellate court made a distinction between guilt and punishment. When the matter was brought before the Supreme Court, it held that the controversy over acquittal and the effect of an acquittal ,and the distinction between guilt and punishment is relevant only to granting or denying permission for the proposed composition. But after permission is granted and the offense is compounded, the accused or convict is to be acquitted, and such acquittal entitles the accused to all fruits and effects of a lawful acquittal.