Mir Raza Ali, owner of the popular dessert shop Wafflix, whose body was found in Gulistan-e-Jauhar after he was allegedly kidnapped from PECHS. — SCREENGRAB/ Youtube
KARACHI:
A judicial commission probing the death of Mir Raza Ali on Tuesday said Dr Usama was running a smear campaign against Police Surgeon Dr Summaiya, who told the panel that it had caused her severe mental distress.
At a September 14 hearing, Dr Summaiya told the commission that she had faced threats and a social media smear campaign over her post-mortem findings. She said she had been stalked for two days, while her personal information and details about her family were circulated online, and claimed the campaign had put her “career and job at risk”. She also said she had approached police over security concerns and lodged a complaint with the NCCIA.
During today’s hearing, the commission heard further arguments over the medical examination of Raza. Dr Summaiya appeared before the panel and submitted an application concerning what she described as a malicious negative campaign against her.
According to the commission, Dr Summaiya said the campaign was being conducted by Dr Usama and that it had caused her severe mental distress. The panel asked, “Is Dr Usama threatening the police surgeon?” The commission told Dr Summaiya that it would issue orders on her application.
“You are already very brave,” the commission told her, while observing that criticism and allegations were being directed at the panel as well. “Mud will be thrown at you; mud is being thrown at us too,” the commission remarked.
The judicial commission also grilled Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Nida Junaid over her involvement in the case despite not being part of the investigating team, questioning who authorised her role and why she was present at key meetings, dealt with witnesses, and handled material linked to the investigation.
Raza, 25, was allegedly found dead in the 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 court ordered a second post-mortem exam of the victim after the first report failed to determine the circumstances surrounding his death. The findings of the second post-mortem consolidated his family’s longstanding claim that he had been murdered. The police probe is under constant scrutiny by the public because of earlier lapses that were even admitted by the Sindh Police chief.
The commission during today’s hearing also questioned Nida over her presence during meetings with the police surgeon, her visits to the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA), her involvement in recording the family’s statement and whether she had ever been formally associated with the investigation.
Nida told the commission that the investigation was still under way and that it was not her case when asked whether she believed Raza’s death was a murder or suicide. “You followed the case so closely. Did you consider this case to be murder or suicide?” the commission asked. “We want to know your opinion,” the panel added.
The questioning turned particularly pointed when the commission examined Nida’s handling of an audio message provided by Ali Shaz, which was leaked in the media.
Nida said Shaz had appeared before her voluntarily on August 6 and that she had forwarded his audio message to Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Samiullah Soomro as she considered it potentially relevant evidence.
The commission questioned why Shaz had not instead been sent directly to the investigating officer. “Ferozabad police station is not the White House,” the commission remarked while questioning the decision.
Read: Judicial commission formed to probe Mir Raza Ali’s death
The panel also questioned Nida over how the audio recording subsequently became public and whether she had played a role in facilitating a particular narrative about Raza’s financial affairs.
The commission noted that the audio had contributed to a “loan/debt narrative” and questioned Nida over the manner in which the material had been handled. The panel also asked whether Nida had been shielding Shaz and whether she had been asked to influence the investigation or damage evidence.
Nida said she had acted on the instructions of senior officers.
The commission questioned her about her attendance at a meeting involving Police Surgeon Dr Summaiya Syed on August 5, as well as her visits to the NCCIA. Nida said Deputy Inspector General (DIG) Amir Farooqui had directed her to visit the agency.
She was also questioned about her presence when statements of Raza’s family were being recorded. Nida said she had been instructed to sit in and take notes, while the statement itself was recorded by the investigating officer.
Counsel for the family Jibran Nasir told the commission that the family had objected to Nida’s presence.
The commission asked Nida whether police had ever formally recorded her statement or entered her involvement in the daily diary. She replied that neither had been done.
The questioning came as the commission continued to examine discrepancies between police records and statements attributed to witnesses. In an earlier hearing, Justice Umar Sial observed that several witnesses had disputed statements attributed to them by investigators and directed the registrar not to obtain further documents from police amid concerns that witness statements had been altered.
Witness accounts recorded
The commission also recorded the statements of several people who had known or dealt with Raza. Witness Sarim told the commission that he had met Raza in December 2025 and had spent around three to three-and-a-half hours with him. He said he had never invested in Raza’s business.
Sarim said Raza had asked him about cryptocurrency trading and later discussed investing Rs3 million in a cloud kitchen. He went on to say that Raza subsequently sent him a message on July 27 seeking Rs30 million and wrote that his “life depends on this”.
Sarim said he declined the request and that Raza later deleted the message. Around 2am on July 28, he said, Raza’s WhatsApp account was no longer available.
The commission questioned how the deleted message had subsequently reached the media. Sarim said he had received it on his Apple Watch and that its contents had become known to others that night.
The witness told the commission that police contacted him on July 30 or 31 through Station House Officer (SHO) Adeel Afzal. He said his statement relating to his first meeting with police had not been recorded.
He told the commission that he had handed over screenshots of the conversation from his Apple Watch to two police teams and provided printouts to the investigating officer, but the material had not been presented before the commission.
Sarim said he believed Raza had been seeking a financial bailout and suggested that his requests may have been connected to loans or cryptocurrency rather than a business investment.
Another witness, Faiz, told the commission that he had known Raza since around 2015-16 through events and had become closer to him after Raza started his business.
Faiz said Raza had borrowed Rs200,000 from him in June 2025 because an online food-delivery payment had been delayed around Eid. He said Raza returned the money on June 30 and later asked for another loan, which Faiz declined.
Faiz said he was contacted by police on August 25 after returning from abroad on August 20. He stated that the police told him that Raza had sought money from Ali Shaz and Aaqib, and that Aaqib had declined a request for Rs1 million.
Also read: Sindh govt again seeks SHC judicial commission to probe Mir Raza murder case
Faiz also told the commission that Raza had asked him for the contact details of Ahsan, the son of a private builder whose wife was a social media influencer. He said Raza later asked his nephew for Rs1 million for 10 to 15 days because of family problems, but his nephew declined.
Faiz disputed portions of the statement attributed to him by police, particularly claims concerning Ali Shaz. He said he had no knowledge of Raza asking Shaz for money and did not know about his cryptocurrency dealings.
Nasir pointed out that police had attributed a statement concerning Aaqib to Faiz, while Ali Shaz had not been made a witness in the interim challan.
Business partners questioned
Business partner Abid Farooq also appeared before the commission and described his financial dealings with Raza.
Abid said he was involved in investment, cattle farming and mobile-import businesses and had invested Rs7 million on two occasions in Raza’s business without a written agreement, although WhatsApp conversations existed between them.
He said he had also invested Rs5 million in August 2025 and Rs10 million in March 2026 in his father’s business at Raza’s request.
According to Abid, returns on the investment had been satisfactory until April 2026, after which they declined. Raza and another partner, Ahmed, had told him payments would resume.
Read more: Govt denies interference in Mir Raza probe
Abid said he had been on good terms with Raza and that Raza had never told him that he was facing financial or other difficulties.
He said police contacted him around August 16 and recorded his statement. DIG Amir Farooqui questioned him about cryptocurrency, his business partner Ahmed and Mir Raza.
Abid said police had asked about his WhatsApp conversations but had not recorded them.
The commission also questioned why Abid had not gone to Raza’s family after learning about his disappearance despite their financial dealings.
Abid said his statement had been recorded on camera but was not read back to him. The commission noted that references to cryptocurrency and Ahmed appeared during questioning but were not reflected in the statement. Abid said he did not know why.
The commission subsequently called Abid’s second partner, Asif, who said he had a very good relationship with Raza and broadly confirmed his brother Abid’s account.
Medical board dispute
There were also reports of a proposed “super medical board” being formed after the medical board headed by the police surgeon completed its examination.
Nasir told the commission that the medical board had been constituted on the orders of the court and questioned whether a new board could effectively override those orders. “Can a super medical board supersede the court’s orders?” he asked.
The commission observed that if a new board was constituted, any challenge to it would lie before the Sindh High Court (SHC). Nasir also said the family’s questions regarding the medical examination had still not been answered.
Also read: Home minister apologises to Mir Raza probe commission
The medical controversy stems from discrepancies identified in the first post-mortem examination. The commission previously heard that several important details were absent from the original report, while the police surgeon had pointed to deficiencies including the absence of an X-ray and scientific examination of the bullet wounds.
The commission also observed that Dr Usama’s further statement appeared to contain allegations against Dr Summaiya and the Sindh chief minister, saying the proceedings should not become a forum for allegations.
Commission seeks more records, witnesses and time
The panel continued to seek information from senior health and police officials, issuing notices to Health Secretary Tahir Sangi, current Director General Health Shehryar Memon and SSP Samiullah Soomro.
The commission also questioned the timing of the change in the DG Health position while proceedings concerning the medical board were under way. “You changed the DG Health while the statement was being recorded,” the commission observed.
“It may be that you have no ill intentions, but the public is watching everything. People are not fools,” the commission remarked. The panel also said people might remain silent because of circumstances and warned against assuming that they did not understand what was happening.
The commission also sought an extension of its term from the SHC chief justice until October 15, citing the emergence of additional witnesses and delays caused by some witnesses being abroad.
It also directed that DSP Siraj Lashari, the investigating officer, and Citizens-Police Liaison Committee (CPLC) representative Kashif appear before it. Questionnaires were to be sent to AIG Azad Khan, DIG Amir Farooqui and DIG Farrukh Lanjhar.
The commission adjourned the proceedings until Thursday.
