SC upholds life sentence in sister’s murder, warns against rising sororicide

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed deep concern over the growing incidence of sororicide, the killing of a sister, while upholding the life imprisonment of a man convicted of murdering his sibling. The court noted that such acts constitute an unnatural breach of trust, one that resonates profoundly within the community and challenges society’s moral conscience.

"Alarmingly, such tragedies are becoming increasingly visible in our society, shattering families and leaving society itself to grapple with the loss of its most fundamental bonds," the five-page judgment stated. Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim, who authored the order, was part of a division bench led by Justice Muhammad Hasham Khan Kakar that heard the appeal against the Lahore High Court’s ruling, which had also upheld the petitioner’s life sentence.

The petitioner had killed his sister approximately 16 to 17 years after she contracted a marriage of her own choice, an act he disapproved of. The Supreme Court noted the profound misfortune of siblings, who are expected to share companionship, trust, and mutual care from childhood, turning against one another in such a grievous manner.

The court emphasised that when a brother takes the life of his sister—the very person he is supposed to protect and cherish—the crime goes beyond ordinary criminality and becomes a serious moral rupture. "Traditionally, a brother’s care for his sister has been seen as a sacred responsibility, and to forsake this duty strikes at the heart of family bonds and the moral fabric of society," the judgment said.

In evaluating the case, the court highlighted that the complainant, the deceased’s husband, was well acquainted with the petitioner, leaving no room for doubt regarding the identity of the assailant. "The prompt nomination, coupled with close familial familiarity, effectively rules out any possibility of mistaken identity," the order stated. It further noted that criminal jurisprudence recognises the rarity of substituting the real offender, particularly in cases where a close relative witnesses a brutal murder.

The judgment added that the record contained no evidence suggesting any ulterior motive on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate the petitioner, reinforcing the veracity of the prosecution’s case. It also highlighted that the couple had lived together for nearly two decades without incident, making any notion of a personal grudge highly implausible.

"The confluence of ocular and medical evidence leads this court to the irresistible conclusion that the conviction and sentence imposed upon the petitioner are neither baseless nor tainted with any legal infirmity," the Supreme Court concluded. The bench maintained that the Lahore High Court had correctly convicted and sentenced the petitioner, dismissing the appeal, refusing leave to further challenge the ruling, and upholding the life imprisonment sentence.