Sindh home minister apologises 'unconditionally' to Mir Raza's judicial commission

Assures Justice Sial of the government's full cooperation and abstention from future interventions

Sindh Home Minister Ziaul Hassan Lanjar on Thursday tendered an unconditional apology before the judicial commission probing the Mir Raza Ali murder case after its chairman, Justice Omar Sial, expressed serious reservations over an earlier intervention of a government lawyer in the panel’s proceedings.

Addressing the SHC justice, Lanjar said, “I apologise to all of you unconditionally,” adding that the government was responsible for ensuring security and justice for the people of Sindh. He also assured the commission of the provincial government’s full cooperation.

A judicial commission was formed to probe the death of young entrepreneur Raza, following a request by the Sindh government, who was allegedly kidnapped from PECHS before his body was found in bushes near a wedding hall in Gulistan-e-Johar on July 29. The case had initially been surrounded by uncertainty over whether he had been murdered or died by suicide. The initial post-mortem findings contained discrepancies, after which a second post-mortem was conducted that confirmed the victim's family's long-standing claim of murder.

During the last hearing, the commission had summoned the home minister after strongly reprimanding Sindh Advocate General (AG) Jawad Dero for interrupting proceedings and objecting to the victim’s family lawyer, Jibran Nasir, asking questions of a key witness. The interruption came during Karachi Police Surgeon Dr Summaiya Syed’s testimony.

“The intervention of the advocate general that day was not right at all. I felt very humiliated,” Justice Sial said during the proceedings.

The Sindh High Court (SHC) justice further said that maintaining the family’s confidence in the commission has remained a major challenge, and he had previously assured the family and other stakeholders that he would not meet any government representative [for the sake of transparency].

While noting that the Sindh government's reputation was also at stake and that the SHC appointed him chairperson of the commission at the government's request, Justice Sial said he was told the commission would work “transparently”.

Speaking during the commission’s hearing, Justice Sial reminded the government officials that the commission was constituted with the stated objective of conducting a transparent probe into the murder case of Mir Raza and that Lanjar’s appearance before the commission was meant to determine whether the government remained committed to the objective.

In response, the home minister said the government had complete confidence in Justice Sial and would provide the commission with all assistance and evidence required for the inquiry.

“We do not want to interfere in the commission’s proceedings. It should conduct the proceedings in whatever manner it considers appropriate,” Lanjar underscored.

Read: GSR, CCTV offer new clues in Wafflix owner Mir Raza’s murder

He added that police were responsible for taking the case to its logical conclusion and that the government would abide by whatever decision the commission reached.

Justice Sial thanked the minister for his assurance and said the commission did not want anyone to believe the Sindh government opposed the investigation.

After a brief recess, the commission resumed its proceedings and scrutinised the response submitted by Dr Usama to a show-cause notice. Expressing dissatisfaction over the response, Justice Sial summoned Dr Usama in person at the next hearing.

He also announced that the statement of Dr Syed would be recorded.

Nasir informed the commission that Mir Raza’s business partner, Ahmed, had levelled allegations against the commission and that Ahmed’s lawyer had made certain disclosures in this regard.

Advocate Nasir requested that Ahmed be summoned again to clarify his position before the commission.

Justice Sial directed Nasir to submit a formal application, to which he agreed.

The commission also summoned Station House Officer (SHO) Adeel Afzal, Head Moharrir Zeeshan, Dr Syed and Professor Naseem for the September 14 hearing, while Dr Usama was directed to appear in person on September 15.

The commission subsequently adjourned the proceedings until Monday.

‘Everyone involved in Mir Raza’s murder would be brought to justice’

Talking to the media after the hearing, Lanjar said that everyone involved in Mir Raza’s murder would be brought to justice.

He said he appeared before the commission because of a misunderstanding led by the government’s legal counsel.

“I have tendered an unconditional apology to the Judicial Commission,” he stressed.

Read more: Discrepancies emerge in Mir Raza autopsy as ‘missing’ details surface in judicial commission hearing

He said the government wanted the commission to complete its work smoothly and ensure justice for Mir Raza’s heirs. “It is necessary for the commission to reach a meaningful conclusion so that the facts can be established,” he added.

The home minister said the court had rejected the family’s request for the formation of a joint investigation team (JIT), but reiterated that the government would provide the commission with whatever assistance it required.

He also said, “We will abide by whatever decision the commission takes.”

Separately, Nasir conducted a media briefing outside the SHC.

He questioned as to why the friends of the deceased did not share important information with the judicial commission instead of discussing it with the media.

Referring to Raza’s business partner Mohammad Ahmed Bhardey, Nasir said the commission had asked him around 15 questions, and he should have disclosed everything he knew before it.

“As soon as he came out of the court, he suddenly remembered a lot of things. Now he is appearing on podcasts and making further revelations. It is now for the commission to summon him again and question him,” he added.

He said all statements made in the media have been submitted to the commission.

“We do not know why these friends were in such a hurry, but their conduct is suspicious,” Nasir opined.

He said the two brothers, Ahmed and Abdullah Bhardey, approached the court for bail, claiming that police were planning to nominate them in the case.

The legal counsel for the victim’s family hoped that Justice Sial would probe them regarding their communication with the heirs.

“The commission should also ask them how many times they contacted the family during the past one-and-a-half months. They had attended the Chehlum of the victim unbothered.”

Also Read: Mir Raza autopsy under fire as commission hears of 'missing' details

He said the proceedings before the commission were being recorded and that Ahmed had asked to make a statement; then why did he not mention debts?

“The moment he came out of the hearing, he remembered his debts.”

“If they had information about important financial transactions, they should present it before the commission instead of discussing it in podcasts,” Nasir underscored.

Nasir reiterated that the family’s demand for a JIT was not aimed at undermining the judicial commission. “We do not know what is happening, but the police is leaking information through the media. We learnt about the forensic report of the bullet casings through the media,” he said, alleging that police officials were creating ambiguity in the case.

He said the government still had the authority to constitute a JIT and claimed that the investigators had so far failed to determine several key aspects of the case.

“Our sole objective is to ensure the arrest of Raza’s killers and identify the people behind the crime,” he stressed.

Detailing police behaviour impacting the probe, Nasir alleged that Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Samiullah Soomro had been carrying the smartwatch in his pocket.

“Why was it handled in that manner?” he asked, adding that whenever anything is sent for forensic examination, directions are provided regarding its handling.

He said he had reservations regarding the handling of this key evidence as opposed to the defined legal process.

Case developments

A judicial commission was formed at the request of the Sindh government to probe the death of Raza, who was allegedly kidnapped from PECHS before his body was found in bushes near a wedding hall in Karachi's Gulistan-e-Johar on July 29. The case had initially been surrounded by uncertainty over whether he had been murdered or had died by suicide. The first post-mortem findings contained discrepancies and omissions, leading to a second post-mortem that confirmed his murder. Consequently, considering the probe "botched", the family filed a petition in the SHC seeking the formation of JIT.

During earlier hearings regarding the formation of JIT, the investigating officer probing the death of Raza told the SHC that investigators were treating the case as murder and had ruled out suicide based on the post-mortem findings. DSP Siraj Lashari said the investigation had restarted “from zero” on August 13 and was being conducted using digital evidence, including CCTV footage. Investigators had recovered a bullet casing but had yet to find the weapon, while final post-mortem and forensic reports were still awaited.

Separately, the judicial commission convened its second hearing on Monday, September 1, wherein it grilled Medico-Legal Officer (MLO) Dr Usama Sheikh over discrepancies in the first post-mortem report filed by him. The commission also recorded the statements of the victim's family and Edhi volunteers who shifted his body during the hearing. After the conclusion of the second hearing, Nasir said the first account of the MLO proved that he was correct about the "botched probe" and, since the commission is not tasked with the probe and can only oversee it, he reiterated that a JIT was crucial for a transparent investigation into the case.

In the hearing convened by the commission on Thursday, the commission noted that Raza's business partner Ahmed Bhurdey gave out unnecessary details that suggested his involvement in the murder rather than absolving him of the crime. It suggested that Bhurdey was worried about Raza's financial backlog more than he cared about what happened to his childhood friend. The commission also grilled the SDPO Arshad Afridi for suggesting that Raza committed suicide after showing the CCTV footage to the family.

Further Reading: Judicial commission questions Mir Raza Ali's business partner over irregularities

The commission probing the case on Friday summoned Gulistan-e-Jauhar SHO Kamran Qureshi and head clerk Zeeshan to appear before it on September 7.

According to the written order issued by the commission, Ehsanullah told the judge that the company had taken back the vehicle provided to him, while the landlord of the house where he had been residing had also evicted him. He said he was now staying at the Ferozabad police station.

The commission directed the investigating officer, DSP Siraj Lashari, to contact the company management and the landlord and address their concerns. It further directed him to assure them that no coercive action would be taken against them in connection with the case.

The commission observed that Ehsanullah was not a suspect in the case and had fully cooperated with Ali’s family during their search for him. He had provided details of his rides and submitted a location map and other ride-related information to the commission.

The commission said that instead of being rewarded for assisting the family, Ehsanullah appeared to be treated like a suspect and was seemingly facing punishment for helping them.

Crucial CCTV footage and a forensic report presented to the commission on September 7 shed new light on the murder of Raza, revealing the timeline of the discovery of his body, the arrival of police and an Edhi ambulance, and the presence of gunshot residue on his body, hinting at the use of a firearm for self-defence.