Zahir Jaffer challenges his death sentence

Claims in an appeal filed in SC that his conviction is result of “erroneous appreciation of evidence”

ISLAMABAD:

 Zahir Jaffer has filed an appeal in the apex court against his death sentence, contending that the trial and high court could not identify the fundamental flaws in the First Information Report (FIR) and that their verdicts were based on “erroneous appreciation of evidence”.

On July 20, 2021, Noor Mukadam was found brutally murdered in Islamabad's upscale F-7/4 sector. Following the discovery of her body, Jaffer was arrested as the prime suspect in the case.

A trial court in Islamabad on February 24, 2022 sentenced Jaffer to death for murdering Noor Mukadam. The court also found Jaffer guilty of rape and handed over 25 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs200,000.

A division bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on March 14 upheld Jaffar’s death sentence while also converting his life imprisonment into a death sentence.
The convict has now filed an appeal against the IHC order through Salman Safdar advocate, contending that the petitioner and his family are aggrieved with the media trial and the constant pressure “that was visibly present during the investigation stage” and subsequently continued during Jaffer’s trial.

"On the flimsiest of charges, innocent people including old parents were prosecuted with Malafide intent. The social media hype clearly resulted in miscarriage of justice as the appellant's trial was conducted in clear violation of Article 10 A of the Constitution which guarantees fair trial.

"The petitioner is in particular aggrieved with the erroneous conviction and excessively harsh punishment. The trial court had acquitted (08) disbelieving the prosecution’s evidence.

“Quite surprisingly the Honourable IHC completely disregarded authoritative judgments that were consulted and relied upon at the time of dealing with quantum of sentence.  Quite seemingly, the appellant’s case, during trial and appellate stage has been dealt with "differently" than an ordinary case.
"The prosecution miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant.

“On the basis of assumptions and presumptions which is no replacement for solid, concrete and admissible evidence under the Qanoon-e Shahadat Ordinance 1984 the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to death due to excessive influence and pressure from the media and NGOs"

The petition contended that there is no denying the fact that the law governing mental illness has not been comprehensively and exhaustively developed in Pakistan compared with other countries.

"The larger bench of the Honourable Supreme Court comprising five worthy judges in the landmark and authoritative judgement reported as PLD 2021 SC 488 provided extensive guidelines for dealing with and determining the issue of mental illness.”

The petition said despite clarification through this elaborate judgment coupled with the presence of strong and overwhelming strong indicators and evidence that  Zahir Jaffer had mental and psychological issues which could fall under the recognized mental ailments, no proper investigation was undertaken ruling out the ‘mental fitness’ of the petitioner to stand criminal trial.

"There is sufficient evidence pointing towards miscarriage of justice and the trial being conducted in violation of Article 10-A of the Constitution.”

The petition said much prior to the occurrence, his family reported—in earlier years, on several occasions—about his aggressive outbursts as well as use of psycho-active substances. There is evidence of treatment of personality assessment, psychotherapy and drug detoxification.

"Petitioner was regularly attending therapy sessions and as per the prosecution’s own case Therapy Works Islamabad was initially brought for intervention at the residence of the petitioner.

“Subsequently, Therapy Works Islamabad was also prosecuted in the same transaction. It is imperative to note that Therapy Works is a rehabilitation centre for curing people with mental illnesses and drug addictions.

“Strong evidence in the trial surfaced that much prior to the arrival of the police on the day of occurrence Therapy Works attempted to intervene, control and treat the petitioner.”

It said the trial court proceeded with the recording of evidence in the absence of the petitioner due to disturbance created by the psychological disorder of the appellant.

"There is also evidence confirming that due to repeated psychotic episodes he was admitted to a jail hospital where the medical officer recommended Tablet Pramcit 20 mg, Tablet Ozip 5mg and Syrup Lylac to pacify his condition.

“It appears that the case of the petitioner has clearly been prejudiced for these reasons as the petitioner could not effectively defend himself or join the criminal investigation.

The petition claimed that the IHC and the session court could not identify the fundamental flaws that existed in the FIR.

 “The FIR omits crucial information such as the exact time of calls; more crucially the identities of the various friends in whose company the deceased remained immediately prior to the reported crime," it added.