SC corrects review error in murder case

The Supreme Court has ruled that a review petition in a death penalty case cannot be dismissed without giving the accused a proper opportunity to be heard.

Justice Shakeel Ahmed, in an additional note, emphasized that constitutional courts are not merely required to follow procedure but also have a responsibility to protect justice, fundamental rights and due process.

A three-member bench headed by Justice Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan converted the death sentence of a convict into life imprisonment in a murder case pending before the Supreme Court since 2011.

The court found that the prisoner’s first review petition had been dismissed in 2012 without providing him or his counsel an opportunity of hearing. As a result, the court declared the 2012 order legally non-existent and treated the latest petition as the convict’s first valid review petition.

Justice Shakeel Ahmed observed that hearing a death penalty review petition in chambers, without allowing the accused a right of audience, violated the principles of natural justice and the constitutional guarantees under Articles 4 and 10-A relating to due process and fair trial.

He stressed that administrative directions or practices cannot override constitutional safeguards, particularly where a person’s life and liberty are at stake.

The judge further held that criminal justice must be based not only on the correctness of the final decision but also on fairness, transparency and legality of the process.

Where reasonable doubt, mitigating circumstances or procedural violations exist, courts must remain willing to correct potential miscarriages of justice. The law, he emphasized, should favour preservation of life when serious doubts arise, especially because the consequences of a death sentence are irreversible.

Justice Shakeel Ahmed described the judiciary as the final safeguard against irreversible injustice. He stressed that judicial finality should never be allowed to take precedence over fairness and constitutional rights.

In cases involving life and liberty, correcting a manifest procedural error is essential to maintaining public confidence in the justice system and ensuring that judicial authority remains grounded in legality, due process and fundamental justice.