KARACHI, Nov 12: A trial court has to decide compromise applications in exercise of its original jurisdiction if all appeals in a case have been taken and decided by the appellate courts , a Sindh High Court division bench ruled on Friday.

The ruling came on a revision petition moved by death row convict Rana Dill Mohammad against rejection of his compromise plea, also signed by the legal heirs of both his victims in a double murder case, by the trial anti-terrorism court (No V) on April 14, 2004.

The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to death by ATC-V for killing Shakeel Ahmed and Rukhsana during a dacoity attempt in the victims's house in Bhittai Colony in 1998.

He challenged his conviction and death penalty before the Sindh High Court, which dismissed his appeal. He took a second appeal to the Supreme Court, which also dismissed his plea and upheld the trial court judgment.

The convict, after dismissal of his appeal by the Supreme Court, moved a compromise application before ATC-V. Endorsed by the victims' legal heirs, the application said the two parties have reached a compromise. The court was requested to acquit the convict in view of the pardon extended by the legal heirs.

The ATC rejected the application holding that it could not entertain a compromise and acquittal plea after the superior courts have upheld the convict's sentence. If a compromise plea was considered at this stage, it might be tantamount to contravention of superior court judgments, which have maintained the conviction and sentence.

The convict questioned the ATC rejection order in the Sindh High Court. A division bench, comprising Justices Wahid Bux Brohi and Rehmat Hussain Jafri, adjudicated the revision petition and reserved its order after hearing the two sides.

By its order announced on Friday, the bench observed that a trial court was required to consider and decide all questions relating to waiver or compounding of offences before or after returning a verdict and awarding a sentence.

An appellate court could also entertain a compromise plea if an appeal was pending before it. Since no appeal was pending before any court, only the trial court could hear the compromise application.

Accordingly, it directed the trial court, that the (rejected) compromise application should be deemed to be pending before it for disposal in accordance with the law.