The Criminal Cases involving Non-Compoundable Offenses cannot be privately settled --- A Pronote Executed to settle a Criminal Case is Void and Unenforceable --- Lahore High Court, Lahore

Islamabad 30-01-2025: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has reaffirmed a fundamental legal principle by declaring a pronote executed to settle a criminal matter as void and unenforceable. The judgment, delivered by Mr. Justice Masud Abid Naqvi, dismissed (Regular First Appeal No. 25617 of 2023) (Allah Ditta Vs. Noor Ahmad), upholding the trial Court’s ruling that agreements attempting to settle non-compoundable offenses privately violate public policy.

The Appellant, Allah Ditta, had filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 760,000/- based on a pronote, alleging that the respondent, Noor Ahmad, had executed the instrument as a guarantee for payment in case his son was found guilty in a criminal case [FIR No. 689/2018 under Sections 392/411 PPC]. When the police declared the defendant’s son guilty, the Plaintiff sought to enforce the pronote.

The trial Court dismissed the suit and imposed special costs of Rs. 50,000/- under Section 35-A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908, citing lack of legal consideration. The Appellant, feeling aggrieved, filed the present appeal before the Lahore High Court.  

The Court emphasized the statutory presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which states that a negotiable instrument is presumed to be executed for valid consideration. However, if the Plaintiff introduces facts contradicting this presumption, the burden shifts back to him to establish that the pronote was executed for lawful consideration.  

Under Section 23 of the Contract Act, 1872, an agreement is void if its consideration or object is illegal. Since the pronote in question was executed to settle a non-compoundable criminal case, the Court held that such agreements violate public policy and cannot be enforced.  

The Court reaffirmed that criminal cases involving non-compoundable offenses cannot be privately settled. Allowing such private settlements would undermine the Justice system and enable blackmail and extortion.  

Mr. Justice Masud Abid Naqvi upheld the Rs. 50,000/- special costs imposed by the trial Court under Section 35-A CPC, discouraging frivolous claims and emphasizing judicial efficiency.  

Finding no legal infirmity in the trial Court’s decision, the Lahore High Court dismissed the appeal at the preliminary stage.

The judgment has been hailed as a strong reaffirmation of public policy principles that protect the integrity of the Criminal Justice System. Legal experts argue that allowing private agreements to settle non-compoundable criminal charges could lead to misuse of legal provisions and open avenues for extortion.  

With this ruling, the Lahore High Court has set a clear precedent that any negotiable instrument executed for an illegal purpose is void. The decision underscores the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that the legal process is not manipulated for private gain and that criminal prosecutions remain a matter of public interest, not private negotiation.

Powered by Froala Editor