Fresh controversy erupted on Wednesday after additional comments from Supreme Court judges in the Noor Mukadam murder case triggered strong backlash from journalists, lawyers, and gender rights advocates. Noor, a 27-year-old woman, was brutally murdered at Zahir Jaffer’s residence in Islamabad in July 2021 — a case that shocked the nation due to the extreme violence involved, including torture and beheading.
Zahir Jaffer’s death sentence has been upheld at every judicial level: first by the trial court, then by the Islamabad High Court in 2023, and finally by a three-member Supreme Court bench on May 20 this year. However, remarks from the judges — particularly those included in an additional note released today — have reignited public anger.
Judge Links Murder Case to ‘Live-In Relationship’, Sparks Instant Backlash
Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, while endorsing the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the death sentence, wrote an additional note stating that the case was a “direct result of a vice spreading in upper society” — referring to what he described as live-in relationships.
He argued that such relationships “defy not only the law of the land but also personal law under Sharia,” calling them a “revolt against God.” He warned the younger generation about “horrible consequences” and suggested that the case should serve as a topic of discussion for social reformers.
His remarks follow earlier observations in May by Justice Hashim Kakar, who headed the SC bench and claimed that a man and woman living together outside marriage was “against religion and morals” — adding that such practices belonged to Europe, not Pakistan.
The timing of these comments — just a day after the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women — further fuelled public outrage.
Journalists and Legal Experts Condemn Remarks as Victim-Blaming
Prominent journalists, lawyers, and gender rights advocates strongly criticised the judges’ comments, arguing that they shifted focus away from the brutality of the crime and toward policing women’s morality.
Journalist Benazir Shah said blaming relationship choices “in a case where a woman was brutally murdered reflects a troubling mindset. Women deserve justice, not judgment.”
Senior journalist Mariana Baabar questioned the logic of linking a murder case to a “living relationship.”
“So death is ordained in a ‘living relationship’? Under which law?” she asked, also rhetorically questioning whether Islam permitted the beheading of a non-mahram woman.
Gender policy analyst Fauzia Yazdani noted that the judge focused on “vices” instead of acknowledging that “murder, irrespective of any vice, is a crime.”
Journalist Zoya Anwer pointed to countless cases where legally married women face extreme violence from their husbands. She criticised the implication that “live-in relationships” were the core issue behind the murder, sarcastically recalling decades of headlines about husbands brutally killing their wives.
According to the United Nations, around 50,000 women and girls were killed by intimate partners or family members in 2024 — roughly one every 10 minutes — underscoring the systemic nature of gender-based violence.
Lawyer Rida Hosain called the judge’s note “appalling”, stressing that a judge’s responsibility is to apply the law, not issue moral lectures in a murder case. Digital rights activist Farieha Aziz also criticised the remarks, pointing out the political affiliation of the judge who authored them.
