The Supreme Court has commuted the death sentence of Frontier Corps (FC) officer Shadiullah to life imprisonment in the case involving the custodial killing of a citizen named Hayat in 2020.

The decision was delivered by a three-member bench comprising Justice Irfan Saadat, Justice Malik Shahzad, and Justice Athar Minallah, with the verdict carried by a 2-1 majority. Justice Athar Minallah disagreed with the ruling and issued a dissenting note.

Case background: Citizen killed after FC convoy attack

According to court records, the incident occurred when an FC convoy came under an IED attack. During the chaos, Hayat, a young man who was on his way to deliver food to his parents in the fields, began running after hearing the explosion.

FC officer Shadiullah took Hayat into custody, allegedly after his colleagues told him that the young man might be involved in the attack. Acting on this suspicion, Shadiullah opened fire, killing Hayat on the spot.

The trial court and the high court had both sentenced Shadiullah to death for the extrajudicial killing, but the Supreme Court has now replaced that sentence with life imprisonment.

Dissenting note by Justice Minallah

Justice Athar Minallah, in his dissenting opinion, upheld the death penalty, describing the act as an “extrajudicial custodial killing” and a form of “corruption on earth.”

He noted that the victim, a university student, was dragged by his hair and shot dead in front of his parents in Turbat, with the accused firing eight bullets into his back using a government-issued weapon.

Justice Minallah wrote that the FC’s responsibility is to protect citizens, not to turn its guns on them, and called the killing cowardly, heinous, and shocking to the public conscience.

'No justification for leniency,' says Justice Minallah

Rejecting the defense’s argument that the officer acted out of anger over injuries sustained by his colleagues in the explosion, Justice Minallah stated that such reasoning was “unacceptable and unjustifiable.”

He warned that leniency or sympathy in cases of extrajudicial killings encourages lawlessness and undermines the rule of law. “Such criminals are a threat to both society and institutions,” the dissent read.

The judge emphasized that extrajudicial killings represent a grave violation of the Constitution and fundamental rights, and that the accused’s confessional statement and forensic evidence had proven his guilt beyond doubt.

Sentence commuted in 2-1 decision

While the dissenting note strongly condemned the crime, the majority decision by Justices Irfan Saadat and Malik Shahzad ruled in favour of commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment, citing judicial discretion and precedent.

Justice Minallah’s powerful dissent, however, continues to draw attention for its principled stand against custodial violence and its call for stronger accountability within law enforcement institutions.