• Perpetrators must be dealt with iron hand, bench tells authorities
• Dismisses appeal against life term for man who killed his wife

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court has expressed concern over the killing of innocent people in the name of so-called honour and ordered the state to stop this “uncivilised, barbaric and abominable practice” and deal with perpetrators sternly.

Terming honour killing a severe type of domestic violence, a single bench of the SHC said that such practice was unabatedly increasing with every passing day and there was a dire need to stop it immediately “before it gets out of hand and creates total anarchy in society”.

Justice Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro of the SHC stated that the offence of “karo-kari” had been declared as Fasad fil Arz (mischief on earth), which is a serious offence under Islamic teachings and described as disobedience to God. “Thus to avoid fasad on earth, perpetrators are required to be dealt with iron hands,” the court said.

“The honour killing has stained the society where the woman is even not given right of defence to prove her innocence against the false charges of developing illicit relations,” it added.

The bench made these observations while dismissing an appeal against life term of a man who killed his wife in the name of so-called honour.

A sessions court had sentenced accused Ghulam Mustafa to life in prison in September last year for killing his wife on the pretext of honour in Kashmore in April 2023.

Besides maintaining the life term of the appellant, the SHC also sentenced him to 14 years in prison for ‘karo-kari’ and ruled that both sentences would run consecutively since the nature of offence was gruesome and cruel.

The bench in its order noted that the motive behind the murder was the so-called practice of “karo kari” and the reason for growing tendency of such offences was the lack of accountability.

“The practice of taking the law in their hands by citizens is becoming increasingly common these days. In this part of world thousands of innocent people are being killed every year in the name of family honour on the flimsy ground of suspicion of ‘Karo-Kari’,” the judge wrote in the verdict.

It stated: “It is even observed that in order to settle the scores of enmity with rival man, the woman is killed and the said person is also killed without reasons and thereafter the male members of the community sit together and conduct a faisla declaring that since the murder was committed to save the honour, therefore, the perpetrator should not face its consequences through punishment by the court of law.

“Islamic kaw under any Fiqah does not permit any citizen to take the law into his own hands and obligates the State to protect the life and liberty of every citizen and severely punish the person who does so,” the judge stated.

“This uncivilised, barbaric and abominable practice must be stopped immediately before it gets out of hand and creates total anarchy in society. Under Islamic teachings the Fasad Fil Arz has been treated as a serious offence and has been described as disobedience to God, thus to avoid Fasad on earth, perpetrators are required to be dealt with iron hands,” it noted.

Regarding the merits of the appeal, the bench observed that the trial court had convicted the appellant on a single count of murder under Section 302 (b) read with Section 311 (Ta’zir after waiver or compounding of right of qisas in qatl-i-amd) of the Pakistan Penal Code for imprisonment of life as ta’zir.

However, the charge regarding the offence of “karo-i-kari’, which has been declared as Fasad fil Arz, was separately framed since it was an offence in addition to the murder. “Therefore, the conviction for the offence has to be recorded separately and it cannot be compounded or waived,” the bench ruled.

“The sentence of qatl-i-amd was awarded for the charge of murder whereas sentence under Section 311 PPC was awarded for spreading fasad on earth and the prosecution has established the guilt of accused for charge of both the offences in the present case,” it said, convicting the appellant.

“The appellant in the given circumstance is also convicted and sentenced for the charge of offence punishable under Section 311 PPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 14 years and conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court for the charge of offence punishable under section 302 PPC is maintained. Since the nature of offence is gruesome and cruel, therefore both the sentences are ordered to run consecutively,” it concluded.

Published in Dawn, May 14th, 2025