The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday dismissed a review petition filed by Zahir Jaffer and maintained its earlier verdict upholding his death sentence in the Noor Mukadam murder case.

Noor, aged 27, was found murdered at Zahir’s Islamabad residence in July 2021, with the probe revealing she was tortured by him before being beheaded. Zahir was sentenced to death by a trial in February 2022 and his sentence has already been upheld by the SC once. Prior to that, the Islamabad High Court had also dismissed his plea challenging the trial court’s verdict.

A three-member bench comprising Justices Hashim Khan Kakar, Salahuddin Pahnwar and Ishtiaq Ibrahim heard Zahir’s review plea on Thursday.

Advocate Khawaja Haris appeared as Zahir’s counsel, while Shah Khawar was present from the respondents’ side. Both presented their arguments during today’s hearing, following which the bench announced its verdict.

After today’s ruling by the SC, a presidential pardon under Article 45 of the Constitution could possibly provide Zahir pardon, or reprieve, or remit, suspend or commute his sentence.

Zahir had sought a review of that SC verdict that upheld his death sentence on May 20, 2025.

The SC’s May 2025 ruling had commuted Zahir’s death sentence on the rape charge to life imprisonment, as decided by the trial court , but did not acquit him of it.

While he was acquitted of the 10-year sentence for kidnapping, a one-year term was handed down for wrongful confinement under Section 342 of the Pakistan Penal Code, according to the SC verdict.

The 47-page review petition was filed by Advocate Khawaja Haris on behalf of Zahir under Article 188 of the Constitution (review of judgments or orders by SC). The state and Noor’s father, Shaukat Ali Muqadam, were made the respondents.

The petition contended that the issue of Zahir’s alleged “unsoundness of mind or mental capacity” that was raised before the SC in an application had not been addressed and was “given short shrift”.

On the rape charges, the review plea argued that it was “apparent from the record that there is no evidence on the record in proof of this allegation”.

More to follow