The Supreme Court has adjourned the hearing on convict Zahir Jaffer’s review petition against his death sentence in the Noor Mukadam murder case for three weeks. As the hearing began, Justice Ali Baqar Najafi told senior counsel Khawaja Haris Ahmed, who represents the convict, that it would be more appropriate for him to start arguments after he issues his additional note, which he has yet to finalize despite endorsing the majority verdict on May 20.
A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Hashim Kakar and including Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim and Justice Najafi, heard the review petition. Justice Kakar recalled that senior counsel Salman Safdar had represented the convict during the previous round of litigation. However, Khawaja Haris pointed out that with the adoption of the Supreme Court Rules 2025, a litigant is now permitted to appoint a counsel of their choice at the stage of review petitions. In response, Justice Kakar questioned whether this rule change was intended for a specific case or if it was a general application.
The court adjourned the proceedings for three weeks, advising the counsel to not only wait for the additional note but also to study the newly adopted court rules.
On May 20, the Supreme Court had upheld the death sentence for Zahir Jaffer by rejecting his appeal in the Noor Mukadam murder case, a crime that shocked the nation in 2021. Noor Mukadam, 27, was brutally murdered on July 20, 2021, at Jaffer’s residence in Islamabad’s Sector F-7/4. Following the discovery of her body, he was arrested as the prime suspect. On February 24, 2022, a trial court in Islamabad sentenced him to death for the murder. He was also convicted of rape and given 25 years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs200,000. Later, on March 14, a division bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) upheld the death sentence while converting his life imprisonment into a death sentence.
In a detailed verdict on June 10, two Supreme Court judges explained the importance of digital evidence, ruling that video footage is admissible under the “silent witness theory” if it is properly authenticated, eliminating the need for eyewitness testimony. “It is a well-known fact that technology has become so ingrained in our lives that everyone is utilizing one form of technology or another,” observed Justice Hashim Kakar, a view supported by Justice Ibrahim. Justice Najafi has yet to issue his additional note.
The Petition
In his review petition, the convict argued that the intense social media campaign following Noor Mukadam’s murder created prejudice against him during the investigation, trial, and appeal stages, violating his fundamental right to a fair trial and due process. He contended that the May 20 judgment did not address the issue of his unsoundness of mind or mental capacity, a point that was raised before the court. This plea, he said, was crucial for determining both the validity of the trial and the severity of his sentence. The petition also claimed that the trial was influenced by a planned and sustained social media campaign by the complainant, and that the trial judge failed to consider his plea within the framework of the law.
