Zahir Jaffer, convicted in the brutal murder of Noor Mukadam, on Wednesday filed a review petition in the Supreme Court. He is challenging the top court’s May 20 verdict, which upheld his death sentence for the gruesome 2021 murder of the 27-year-old at his sprawling Islamabad mansion.
Earlier this year, a three-member bench, led by Justice Hashim Kakar and comprising Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim and Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, had upheld Jaffer’s death penalty and fine. The apex court, however, reduced the sentences of co-accused—Jaffer’s watchman and gardener—ruling that the punishments they had already served were sufficient.
This high-profile case garnered significant public attention in 2021 when Jaffer, the son of an industrialist, brutally assaulted and murdered Mukadam, the daughter of a former ambassador. The victim made repeated attempts to escape on the night she was killed but was obstructed by two members of Jaffer’s household staff. The killer then proceeded to torture her with a knuckleduster and used a “sharp-edged weapon” to behead her.
In February 2022, a district and sessions court sentenced Jaffer to death, alongside a 25-year prison term with hard labor and a fine of Rs200,000, concluding a trial that spanned over four months. Nearly a year later, in March 2023, the Islamabad High Court upheld Jaffer’s death sentence and further upgraded his 25-year sentence to an additional death penalty, following appeals filed against the initial convictions.
Challenge to Video Evidence and Mental Capacity In the review petition filed by Advocate Muhammad Usman Mirze, Jaffer’s defense primarily argues against the prosecution’s reliance on video recordings. The plea contends that the May 20 Supreme Court judgment failed to acknowledge that these recordings were not properly proven during the trial.
“Portions of these so-called recordings, on the basis whereof the inference of ‘last seen’ has been drawn against the petitioner, were never played during the trial; rather only hearsay evidence thereof was led by the prosecution at the trial in the form of oral statement,” the petition states.
It further asserts that the forensic report from the PFSA regarding the purported video recordings “is not proved as per the law prevalent at the relevant date and time, as neither the scribe nor the executant (i.e., the concerned Forensic Expert/s) entered the witness box to authenticate the same on oath, rather it was merely produced in his statement by the learned Prosecutor while closing the prosecution evidence. As such, even the authenticity of the aforesaid video recordings do not stand proved in this case,” the plea argues.
The petition strongly emphasizes: “Once the video recordings are excluded from consideration because of the lack of proof and authenticity thereof, one of the essential links in the chain of evidence to make out a case of capital punishment against the petitioner on the basis of circumstantial evidence gets severed, and, consequently, the judgment dated 20.05.2025 merits to be reviewed accordingly.”
Furthermore, Jaffer’s review plea raises concerns about his mental state and capacity at the time of the incident. It argues that the Supreme Court’s May 20 verdict “suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record as it has not addressed the issue of unsoundness of mind or mental capacity of the petitioner.” The plea also highlights that the court had not ruled on Jaffer’s petition seeking an examination by a medical board.
“The record of the trial court shows that the question of the mental capacity of the petitioner to stand trial was never taken or addressed seriously as mandated by this august Court in, inter alia, Safia Bano’s case,” the petition reads. “The petitioner was considered a pariah throughout the trial and all manifestations of his mental disorder were presumed to be fake and feigned and, as such, his case relating to mental disorder was never considered with fairness and as required by law, and even no question was put to him within public domain or hearing to ascertain his mental condition so as to make a tentative assessment as to whether he was capable of defending himself at the trial.”
Zahir Jaffer’s Medical Evaluation It is notable that a two-member medical board from the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) conducted a physical and mental evaluation of the convict at Adiala Jail on Monday, as reported by The News on Tuesday. The board consisted of Dr. Amir Naveed from the Neurology Department and Dr. Shafqat Nawaz from the Psychiatry Department of PIMS.
Jail officials confirmed that the examination took place inside Central Jail Rawalpindi and is part of the legal process required before a mercy petition is submitted to the President of Pakistan. Jail authorities stated that the medical board was constituted following a formal request from the jail administration to the director of PIMS.
The board’s mandate is to assess the convict’s mental and psychological condition, and its report will be forwarded along with the mercy petition to the President. Officials also disclosed that Jaffer was deemed mentally sound at the time of his initial incarceration in Adiala Jail and had no prior history of psychiatric illness. However, after being sentenced to death by the trial court, he received treatment at the jail hospital for nearly two months before being declared fit and subsequently moved to the death cell.
