PESHAWAR, Sept 10: The Peshawar High Court on Thursday sought details about the policy adopted by the governments of Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan regarding convicts undergoing imprisonment due to non-payment of Diyat money.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Tariq Pervez and Justice Ijaz Afzal directed Deputy Attorney-General Hamid Farooq Durrani to furnish the information on next hearing.

The bench is seized with two cases: an application filed by Azizullah and 16 other convicts in the Haripur central prison and a petition filed by Ameerzada, a convict, who has challenged the Diyat provision incorporated in the Pakistan Penal Code through the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance.

All the prisoners have completed their terms two or more years ago but are not being released owing to non-payment of Diyat, Arsh and Daman (compensation prescribed in the Qisas and Diyat law for murder and injuries).

The bench described both cases as important. Advocate Saeed Baig appeared as amicus curiae and contended that the Lahore High Court had delivered a judgment in August 2002, ordering that destitute prisoners who completed their terms and had no money to pay Diyat should be released if they had undergone six-month rigorous imprisonment in addition to their prison term.

Mr Baig said the LHC had ordered that the Diyat money outstanding against such prisoners should be paid by the government from the Zakat or Baitul Mal funds. He said the court had ruled that such prisoners could apply for assistance from the Zakat and Baitul Mal funds under section 544-A of the Criminal Procedure Code. He said the Punjab government had released a number of prisoners in the wake of that judgment.

The counsel pointed out that Sindh and Balochistan had been following the same judgment. He said the LHC judgment had been challenged and pending adjudication before the Supreme Court but the apex court had not suspended its operative part.

The bench observed that the LHC judgment amounted to amending the law, saying it was clearly mentioned in the law that a prisoner should not be released unless he had paid Diyat to heirs of the victim.

It further observed that the provision of Diyat in the PPC was an Islamic provision and under the constitution it could be only challenged before the Federal Shariat Court.

Advocate Naveed Maqsood, appearing for petitioner Ameerzada, contended that he had challenged the said provision on the touchstone of fundamental rights and not on the basis of it being violative to Islamic injunctions. The bench asked Mr Baig whether he had details about how many prisoners were released on the basis of the LHC judgment.