Three men- including a father and son from Peterborough- subjected a female member of their family and her new boyfriend to an “appalling” attack at the Sheffield restaurant they work at, in what a judge described as being “potentially honour-based” violence.

Defendants Khurram Shahzad (54), of Cobden Avenue, Peterborough, his son Makaram Shahzad (23), of Bamber Street, Peterborough, and Irfan Khan each played a role in the violence that was meted out at a London Road restaurant, Sheffield Crown Court heard during a hearing held on August 21, 2025.

Judge Sarah Wright told the trio of attackers: “This was an appalling, violent and disturbing incident, perpetrated against a member of your family and her chosen partner clearly because you, Khurram Shahzad, and you, Makaram Shahzad, objected to the relationship.”

“It appears you Khurram Shahzad and your family were angry about the relationship, and that is what sparked the trip to Sheffield.

Khurram Shahzad, his son Makaram Shahzad were sentenced in Sheffield.

placeholder image — Khurram Shahzad, his son Makaram Shahzad were sentenced in Sheffield.

“This was a quasi-domestic incident, and was potentially honour-based.”

She added: “You clearly caused serious harm and distress to your victims.”

Prosecutor Amy Earnshaw told the court that the Crown regards the “honour-based” aspect of the case as being amongst the aggravating factors in the case.

Honour-based abuse is a crime or incident committed to protect or defend the 'honour' of a family or community,” guidance from South Yorkshire Police states.

It suggests that those deemed to have “shamed or embarrassed” their family or community by behaving in a certain way may be “punished” for breaking their honour code.

The court heard how the two complainants were both working at the restaurant when the incident unfolded on May 11, 2025, beginning with Makaram Shahzad speaking to the female complainant in a “heated manner” before all three defendants subjected both her and her partner to violence.

The entirety of the attack was captured on CCTV, which was played to the court during the course of the defendants’ sentencing hearing.

Judge Wright said she believed Khurram Shahzad was “clearly the instigator” of the attack, whilst his son Makaram Shahzad “meted out some serious violence.”

She noted that Khan, 46, had a “more minor involvement” in the incident, only becoming involved at “the end.”

Describing the roles each of the defendants, Judge Wright told the court: “Makaram Shahzad, you initially spoke to her [the female complainant] in a heated manner, and then you, Khurram Shahzad sparked violence hitting him [the male complainant] to the head, and trying to strangle him.”

“Makaram Shahzad, you pushed [her] and hit [him] to the head. Irfan Khan you arrived later, and it appears there was a struggle with [him] on the stairs.”

Ms Earnshaw told the court that the attack only came to an end when the male complainant picked up a telephone to call the police.

“The police were contacted and the defendants were located at a service station,” Ms Earnshaw said.

Ms Earnshaw told the court, however, that the complainants subsequently withdrew their support for the prosecution and did not provide a statement to the court.

During the course of his police interview, Khurram Shahzad sought to claim that CCTV footage which captured the violence had been “doctored” and the male complainant had been the one to attack him.

All three defendants were subsequently charged with the offence of affray. They all entered guilty pleas during a plea hearing held at the same court in June 2025.

They each held a clean criminal record, prior to this incident.

Defending Khurram Shahzad, Richard Canning said his client had spent time on remand following the incident, which, he suggested, had been a “salutary” experience.

Mr Canning said his client, who had also spent a number of days on a qualifying curfew, had expressed remorse for his actions.

He referred Judge Wright to the recommendation in the report for the “inevitable” custodial sentence to be suspended.

Amy-Jo Cutts, representing Makaram Shahzad, acknowledged her client was in a different position to the other defendant due to his immigration status.

Judge Wright noted that Makaram Shahzad’s asylum application had been refused by the Home Office, and suggested his claim that his leave to remain until November 2025 was incorrect.

Ms Cutts said Makaram Shahzad’s lawyer is set to appeal against the decision to reject his asylum application.

She referred Judge Wright to the recommendation of a community disposal in his case, but Judge Wright said she would not be able to pass a community sentence for a defendant with no leave to remain.

Ms Cutts told the court that Makaram Shahzad had expressed his remorse through his pre-sentence report.

Dale Harris, representing Khan, argued that his client’s role in the attack was distinctly more minimal, and said he ended up at the scene after obliging the other defendants’ request for a lift to the restaurant.

Cop dubbed "PC Predator" jailed for second time for having sex with victim of crime

Mr Harris said that Khan, of Crawley Road, North London, initially waited outside the restaurant, and only became involved when he heard commotion coming from inside the restaurant.

Judge Wright handed Khurram Shahzad to nine months’ imprisonment, suspended for 12 months, and ordered him to complete a 26-day rehabilitation activity requirement, along with 200 hours of unpaid work.

She jailed Makaram Shahzad for three months, and sentenced Khan to a 12-month conditional discharge.