ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) has held that it is a settled principle that capital punishment is to be awarded only in the rarest of rare cases and where no alternative is reasonably available.
A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar and comprising Justice Salahudiin Panhwar and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim, issued judgment in jail petitions against the judgment passed by the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
Convicts Hamza Jehangir, Aftab Zafar and Muhammad Yasir as well as complainant Mukhtar Ahmed Rathore had filed appeals against the common judgment dated 27.03.2025 (‘impugned judgment’), rendered by the learned Islamabad High Court, Islamabad (‘the High Court’), in Criminal Appeals No 228, 209, 211, and 212 of 2023, whereby the convictions and sentences of death awarded to the petitioners, namely, Aftab Zafar, Hamza Jahangir, and Muhammad Yasir, and acquittal of respondent-accused Asad Mumtaz, recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Islamabad (East), were maintained.
Complainant Mukhtar Ahmad Khan Rathore (PW.1), moved an application (Exh.PA) before the SHO PS Bara Kahu, regarding missing of his five-year-old son, Umar Rathore, who was abducted by the convicts and later on murdered. The trail court had convicted and awarded death sentences to Aftab Zafar, Hamza Jehangir and Muhammad Yasir for murdering the minor Umar Rathore.
Trial court found the evidence brought on record by the prosecution sufficient to convict Hamza Jahangir, Aftab Zafar and Muhammad Yasir. However, extending benefit of doubt to petitioner Asad Mumtaz who was acquitted. The convictions were challenged by the petitioners-convicts before the learned High Court by filing appeals, but the same were dismissed through the impugned judgment.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals of the appellants, maintaining their convictions recorded by the trial court and high court, however, their death sentences were commuted into imprisonment for life.
The court noted that the findings of acquittal of respondent-accused are based on proper appreciation of evidence to which no exception can be taken. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. “Even where guilt is established in accordance with law, the existence of such lingering doubt militates against the imposition of the death penalty, as it introduces a measure of caution in view of the irreversible nature of the punishment,” says the judgment.
“In these circumstances, the ends of justice would be adequately served by awarding a lesser sentence rather than the extreme penalty of death to the petitioners convicts,” the judgment concluded.
