ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Friday deferred a review petition filed by Zahir Jaffer, the convict in the Noor Mukadam murder case, after observing that arguments should only begin once an additional judicial note is issued.
The petition, argued by senior lawyer Khawaja Haris Ahmed, challenges the death penalty handed to Jaffer for Noor’s killing in July 2021 which was upheld in on May 20 this year. Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, however, reminded the counsel that he had yet to release his own reasoning to accompany the court’s judgement, which upheld the death sentence. He advised Haris to first study the forthcoming note before proceeding.
The matter was heard by a three-judge bench headed by Justice Hashim Kakar, with Justices Ishtiaq Ibrahim and Najafi also on the panel. Justice Kakar noted that the convict had been represented by Salman Safdar in earlier proceedings, but Haris argued that the recently adopted Supreme Court Rules 2025 now allow a party to appoint counsel of choice at the review stage. Justice Kakar asked whether this change was of general application or tailored to a specific matter.
Noor Mukadam murder: SC cites CCTV as ‘silent witness’ in upholding Zahir Jaffer’s sentence
The bench adjourned the case for three weeks, instructing the defence to review both the additional note and the new rules.
Jaffer was sentenced to death by an Islamabad trial court in February 2022 for murdering Noor, 27, at his residence in Sector F-7/4. He also received 25 years’ imprisonment for rape, though the Islamabad High Court later converted that punishment into a second death sentence. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the murder conviction on May 20, with two judges stressing the role of authenticated digital evidence, declaring that properly verified video footage could serve as a “silent witness.”
In his latest petition, Jaffer has argued that extensive social media coverage prejudiced proceedings at every stage, investigation, trial, and appeal, violating his right to due process. He also claimed that questions about his mental health were overlooked, a point he insists is crucial for determining the validity of the conviction and the severity of the sentence.