FIAZ ALIAS MANSHA vs State — 2026 SCMR 413 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

FIAZ ALIAS MANSHA VS State. Sections 302(b) & 34, Pakistan Penal Code, 1860---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7---Qatl-i-amd, common intention, act of terrorism---Reappraisal of evidence---Applicability of Anti-Terrorism Act---Scope. Accused were charged for committing murder of brother of complainant. All three petitioners-convicts in their voluntary confessional statements unequivocally admitted having conspired and executed murder of deceased, who was a sitting Judicial Officer at his residence, solely on account of personal grudge borne by petitioner "F" arising from judicial proceedings in which he was produced before deceased while in custody. Deceased Judicial Officer had no personal motive or enmity against any of petitioners-convicts. Although at the time of occurrence deceased was not performing official duty and was inside his house, assassination was deliberately planned and executed due to action taken by deceased in his official capacity as Judicial Officer. Held: Where a public servant is targeted and murdered because of performance of official duties, such act exceeds boundaries of private vengeance and strikes at the very core of judicial system and rule of law. Such targeted killing creates fear among public servants and discourages them from performing duties freely and impartially. Object of offence was not merely settlement of personal score but also to intimidate persons serving judicial system and performing public duties. Cumulative effect of such act squarely fell within definition of terrorism under Section 6, Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, particularly Sections 6(1)(b) and 6(2)(f), as act was committed to intimidate public servants, create fear and insecurity in society and influence performance of public duties. High Court rightly concluded that murder of Judicial Officer, being directly connected with performance of official duties, constituted an act of terrorism. Conviction and sentence under relevant provisions of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 were justified. However, conviction of petitioner-convict "F" was maintained and death sentence was commuted to imprisonment for life. Conviction and sentence of remaining petitioners-convicts did not warrant interference. Petition was converted into appeal and partly allowed.

FIAZ ALIAS MANSHA vs State — 2026 SCMR 413 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR