'You botched the case, you're also suspicious'

The judicial commission probing the death of Mir Raza came down hard on the police investigation on Thursday, with Justice Umar Sial telling SSP Samiullah Soomro that the case had been "botched" in its crucial early days and questioning whether the police officer himself had become a subject of suspicion. The commission also grilled senior health officials over the abrupt replacement of a medical board, including the decision to replace Karachi-based specialists with doctors from Hyderabad, and questioned the legal authority behind the changes. The proceedings, headed by Justice Sial, produced a series of pointed exchanges over the handling of CCTV footage, Mir Raza's mobile phone and smartwatch, the crime scene, witness statements and the police's apparent focus on a possible suicide and financial-pressure narrative. During questioning, Justice Sial told SSP Soomro that the first six days of the investigation were crucial and appeared to have seriously compromised the case. "You botched the case. You are also suspicious," the judge remarked, according to the proceedings. Soomro told the commission that he had been assigned the investigation on August 2 and headed a team that included SSP East Zubair Nazir, East Investigation SSP Usman Saduzai and, later, officers from the Citizens-Police Liaison Committee. The commission repeatedly questioned why the family's statements had not been formally recorded. Soomro said he had directed SSP Zubair Nazir to meet the family, but was told that they had initially declined. Family members disputed that account during the proceedings, saying they had met police officers on August 3. Justice Sial questioned Soomro over the failure to personally ensure that the family's statements were recorded, saying that he was the head of the investigation team regardless of the administrative control exercised by other officers. The commission also challenged the police's handling of CCTV footage. Soomro acknowledged that only footage from one street had been examined showing Mir Raza travelling in the area, despite the presence of multiple streets and dozens of cameras around the location. Soomro said more than 30 CCTV clips had been collected, but Justice Sial demanded the relevant memos and questioned why investigators had not systematically secured footage from all surrounding streets before it became unavailable. The judge also questioned a video circulated in the media in which Mir Raza appeared to throw something away. Police had suggested that he was throwing his mobile phone, but Soomro conceded that the footage did not establish this conclusively. The handling of the mobile phone came under further scrutiny. Soomro said he had neither seen the phone nor the officer who recovered it, while the commission questioned why the recovery and subsequent transfer of such a crucial piece of evidence had not been properly documented. The smartwatch was another major point of contention. Soomro said it had been seized before he took charge and that he had not personally seen it.