August 18, 2026
By Xari Jalil
LAHORE
Early morning on November 4, 2014, in a small village in Kot Radha Kishan’s Rosa Tibba Village, eight month pregnant Shama managed to cook a meal for the last time for her and her husband Shahzad, just before they went towards the kiln for their daily work – making bricks.
It would be the last time they ever did anything, because exactly after that they would end up dead at the hands of a violent unruly mob, who would brutally torture the Christian couple before burning them alive.
The incident details were published across newspapers and aired on television in the country – other countries were also shocked at the gruesome incident. The mob comprised hundreds of people who set them alight in the kiln fire.
Yet on July 9, 2026, a decision taken by the Supreme Court let off the last three accused from death row and subsequently acquitted them. A written order has been released only now.
The lynching shocked human rights defenders, especially those from the Christian community, who felt that the accused should have gotten their due.
Rights activist Michelle Chaudhry of the Cecil and Iris Chaudhry Foundation (CICF) spoke to Voicepk about the verdict whose written order was only recently released but the news had been out since some time. Michelle has been taking care of the children of Shama and Shahzad ever since the incident took place and they had no reliable family to take care of them.
“This verdict has left us very disappointed and concerned, because no one is being held accountable for this brutal murder that took place in 2014,” she said. “It has taken the lives of two innocent people but it also shattered the lives of their children forever.”
Michelle Chaudhry said that the incident had left the Christian community in shock and horror. At the time it took place it had even sent shock waves across the world.
“And yet 12 years later out of a mob of hundreds, not one person has been held for this murder,” she said. “I don’t have words to express what is felt across the Christian community in Pakistan since this judgement.”
Chaudhry questioned if this was the price of the life of religious minorities in Pakistan.
“When and how will the children of Shama and Shahzad ever get justice? The impunity of violence against religious minorities must stop.”
Key legal findings leading to acquittal
But the Supreme Court does not see it this way.
According to the court the three death row convicts have been acquitted on the basis of what it said were fundamental flaws, serious omissions, and irreconcilable contradictions in the prosecution’s evidence.
The decision was made by a three-member bench comprising Justice Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan, Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, and Justice Shakeel Ahmad. It brings an end to the judicial process stemming from one of the most brutal mob attacks against religious minorities in the country’s history.
Punishments given to the accused by the Anti Terrorism Court in Lahore, included under Section 302(b) PPC death on two counts to each, with an imposition of Rs.100,000/- to each as compensation to be paid to the heirs of the deceased; Under Section 148 PPC rigorous imprisonment (RI) for two years each; Under Section 7(a) of the ATA, 1997 death on two counts to each; Under Section 7(g) of the ATA, 1997 rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences were to run concurrently.
However a jail petition was filed in 2019, on basis of which the supreme court has taken the decision of acquitting the accused.
In November 2016, the trial court had acquitted 95 co-accused, while convicting and sentencing 10 others. Later these 10 were also acquitted by the High Court, except for the three namely Muhammad Irfan son of Shakoor, Muhammad Riaz and Mehdi Khan, all of whom have now been acquitted in 2026. The brick kiln owner Yousaf Gujjar was also acquitted.
Key legal findings leading to acquittal
The court identified a series of critical prosecution failures that entitled the petitioners to the benefit of the doubt as a matter of legal right.
Omission from the initial FIR
Muhammad Irfan, whom private witnesses later accused of being the sole individual who threw the couple into the furnace, was not named anywhere in the original First Information Report (FIR) filed by Sub-Inspector Muhammad Ali (PW-16), despite 59 other individuals being named.
Contradictory eye-witness accounts
Police witnesses claimed that 12 individuals dragged and burnt the victims. In stark contrast, private witnesses (relatives of the deceased) claimed 11 people dragged the victims, but insisted Irfan was the sole person who threw them into the fire.
Exoneration of co-accused
Relatives of the deceased completely exonerated six out of seven primary suspects initially named in the FIR (including the kiln owner and managers) during their court testimonies.
Absence of physical corroboration
The court highlighted trial testimony showing that operating the furnace safely required special wooden shoes and wet clothing due to extreme radiant heat. None of the convicts wore such protective gear, nor did any receive burn injuries during the alleged assault.
Uncorroborated evidence
Out of 106 total suspects initially tried by the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) Lahore in 2016, 93 were acquitted at trial, and 10 more were acquitted by the Lahore High Court in 2019. The Supreme Court ruled that identical prosecution evidence, already disbelieved against acquitted co-accused, could not sustain capital punishment without independent corroborative evidence—which was entirely absent.
Court orders & dismissal of state appeal
Setting aside the earlier judgments of both the Lahore High Court and the ATC, the Supreme Court ordered the immediate release of Muhammad Irfan, Muhammad Riaz, and Mehdi Khan from custody, provided they are not required in any other case.
Concurrently, the apex court dismissed Criminal Petition No. 1109-L of 2019, filed by the State of Punjab to challenge the prior acquittals of 102 co-accused, ruling that acquitted individuals enjoy a double presumption of innocence that the prosecution failed to rebut.
An unspeakable tragedy
According to details, on the morning of November 4, 2014, a heavily provoked mob of approximately 500 to 600 people stormed the brick kiln situated in Chak No. 59, Kot Radha Kishan, Kasur District. The mob gathered after local mosque loudspeakers broadcast false accusations claiming that Sajjad Masih (also known as Shahzad) and his pregnant wife, Saima (alias Shama)—both belonging to the Christian community—had allegedly desecrated pages of the Holy Quran.
Despite the presence of a small police contingent, the crowd breached the brick kiln contractor’s office, where the couple had taken refuge, tore down the roof, dragged them out, beat them badly, and then dragged them towards and flung them into the fiery furnace of the kiln. Both victims continued to scream and writhe while the mob watched and ultimately the two succumbed on the spot to horrific burn injuries.
Meanwhile, acknowledging the atrocious nature of the crime, the supreme court emphasized that judicial decisions must be rooted strictly in “untainted legal proof rather than emotion”.
“The shocking incident of this case which took the lives of two innocent persons of Christian community has made us highly saddened and depressed… However, without being swayed away by emotions or the heinousness of the offense, we proceed to decide the instant case as per law on the subject,” said Justice Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan.
Shattered lives
While the angry mob was dragging his parents towards the kiln fire, Suleman, only 6 years old, watched on. His sisters Sonam and Poonam were only four and two, respectively. The girls were still too small to understand much. If they understood one thing it was that their parents were not with them anymore.
“We want Mummy and Papa,” they would cry for years to come.
Today they are all old enough to understand and Michelle Chaudhry recognizes this. Speaking about the three children that Shama and Shahzad Masih left behind, Michelle says that CICF had always taken care of the children and still continued to do so.
“We gave them psychological counselling, we also took care of their financial needs and education,” she said about the months and years following their parents’ merciless and brutal murder. “Suleman has turned 18 this year while Sonam is 16 and Poonam is 14. When we talk about the impact of the violence on the children, the sense of abandonment and deprivation, the weight of this is too much. The least they could have felt was a sense of justice if they saw the criminals who did this to their parents be punished. They would have felt that they matter to the State of Pakistan.”
Michelle also recounts other incidents including Joseph Colony and recently the Jaranwala incident and said not one person has been brought to justice to date for the crimes they have committed.
Meanwhile, when asked about his opinion on the decision, Father Boniface ‘Bonnie’ Mendez, who lives in Faisalabad, expresses his lack of surprise. “Pakistani courts make decisions according to their own whims,” he says simply.
Peter Jacob a leading minority rights activist says that this kind of decision is ‘not unheard of’.
“The trial was conducted in at the Anti-Terrorism Court under the Anti-Terrorism Law…which is not best of laws,” he says. “The mob was used as a cover in this case – – a cover used in cases of heinous crimes like murder. So it is not unheard of,” he said.
“Also in many of the cases the punishments given by the ATC cannot hold in appeal in the High Courts or Supreme Court. It is because the investigation is not meritorious, and so the open court, ordinary court will not hold this conviction. The merit is not in the investigation, or the proceedings – the prosecution is not satisfactory to international standards of criminal justice.”
Jacob says that the best takeaway from this case is that hate crimes, howsoever severe they are, must be tried in ordinary courts under ordinary law. And the police must be given the obligation and responsibility to collect proper evidence and conduct a proper prosecution trial, which then entails a fair judgment and fair punishment.
He highlights that in the case of Shama and Shahzad, it is understood by most people that there were some people behind the death of the couple, however they have no idea if they were rightly convicted, or if there were any lacunas.
“Despite the fact that these accused have spent a long time behind bars, it is still advisable that the government not only conducts a proper investigation, and re-investigation of the case, and at least take all the lessons from this case to prevent any similar injustice, and see that justice is dispensed in other cases at least,” he says. “The government can also go in the appeal, if they trust their system, their investigation and prosecution, they can, they can still challenge the outcome of the appeal. There is however one review possible at the Supreme Court level also.”
However at the end of the day, Jacob maintains that the court’s decision has ‘disappointed everyone about the outcome of one of the most well-known and heinous human rights violations’.