The Supreme Court of Pakistan has released its detailed written verdict in Noor Mukadam murder case on June 10, upholding the death sentence of convict Zahir Jaffar. While the top court maintained his conviction for rape, it commuted the associated death sentence to life imprisonment.
The judgment spans 13 pages and reiterates the court’s stance that Jaffer, who was found guilty of the brutal killing, is “a ruthless killer” and “not worthy of sympathy.”
According to the verdict, the Supreme Court upheld the rulings of both lower courts, terming them correct and unanimous. A key element of the court’s reasoning was based on the Silent Witness Theory—a legal principle that allows for video evidence to be accepted even in the absence of an eyewitness.
Read: ‘This is for every woman’
The court noted, “Authentic footage can serve as self-sufficient evidence, and recorded video or images can be presented as testimony.”
The apex court stressed that footage obtained through a reliable system could be admissible on its own, citing a precedent from a bank robbery case where video footage was accepted without any eyewitness. It added that American courts have widely recognised the Silent Witness principle.
In Jaffer’s case, the court noted that CCTV footage, the DVR, and the hard disk were all admissible forms of evidence. The court stated that there was no indication of tampering in the video recordings, the identification of the accused was accurate, and the DNA report confirmed the rape.
The murder weapon was also found to have the victim’s blood on it.
The verdict observed, “The convict failed to provide any explanation for Noor’s presence. Digital evidence is now considered primary testimony. If CCTV footage meets the set standards, no further verification is necessary.”
Further, the court upheld Jaffer’s death sentence for murder but converted his sentence for rape into life imprisonment. He was acquitted of the abduction charge, while his sentence for unlawfully confining Noor was maintained.
The Supreme Court also ruled that the punishments for co-accused Muhammad Iftikhar and Muhammad Jan would stand. However, in a show of leniency, it ordered their release on the grounds that they had already served sufficient time.
The judgment concluded with a note that Justice Ali Baqar Najafi would add a supplementary note to the verdict.
Read More: ‘Noor was kept in captivity for 3 days’
Noor, 27, was brutally murdered on July 20, 2021, at a residence in Islamabad’s F-7/4 sector. An FIR was lodged the same day, leading to the arrest of Jaffer at the crime scene.
In February 2022, a district and sessions court handed Zahir the death penalty for murder and sentenced him to 25 years of rigorous imprisonment for rape. Two domestic staff members, Mohammad Iftikhar and Jan Mohammad, were each sentenced to 10 years in prison for their involvement.
Zahir’s parents, Zakir Jaffer and Asmat Adamji—both prominent business figures—were indicted in October 2021 but later acquitted. Similarly, six employees of Therapy Works, who arrived at the scene before the police, were also cleared of charges by the trial court.
Read More: Noor Mukadam’s killer claims insanity
Previously, a three-member bench headed by Justice Hashim Kakar, and comprising Justices Ishtiaq Ibrahim and Ali Baqar Najafi, had dismissed Jaffer’s appeal.
The court upheld the Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) previous ruling, which had affirmed the trial court’s death sentence verdict and replaced Zahir’s jail term for rape with an additional death penalty.
During those hearings, Jaffer’s defence counsel, Salman Safdar, argued that the prosecution’s case rested heavily on CCTV footage and DVR recordings.
He questioned the chain of custody of the digital evidence and contended that the footage could not be considered conclusive without full verification. His objections included claims that the footage, when presented to the IHC on a USB, could not be played, and therefore should not qualify as definitive proof.
Despite these arguments, the apex court found the digital evidence reliable and legally admissible.
