Mir Raza and Hina Javed cases raise questions over police investigations and calls for judicial commissions

The murder cases of Mir Raza in Karachi and Hina Javed in Rawalpindi have drawn attention to concerns over investigative procedures

RAWALPINDI/LAHORE/KARACHI: The murder cases of Mir Raza in Karachi and Hina Javed in Rawalpindi have drawn attention to concerns over investigative procedures, forensic evidence and demands by the victims’ families for independent judicial commissions.

According to a *Minute Mirror* investigation, both families have expressed dissatisfaction with the investigative bodies formed by provincial authorities and called for greater transparency and independent scrutiny of the cases.

Mir Raza, a 25-year-old businessman and son of Dr Ghulam Murtaza, was found dead with a gunshot wound in bushes in Karachi’s Gulistan-e-Jauhar area on July 29, 2026. Meanwhile, Hina Javed, a 45-year-old executive working in Parliament’s media department, was found dead at her Lal Kurti residence in Rawalpindi on August 20, with reported torture marks and a cord around her nec Families question investigations

In the Mir Raza case, the family reportedly challenged the initial explanations surrounding his death and questioned the focus on his cryptocurrency trading activities. The family subsequently approached the Sindh High Court on August 24, 2026, seeking the formation of a joint investigation team (JIT).

A judicial commission headed by Sindh High Court Justice Omar Sial was later established to examine alleged police negligence.

In Hina Javed’s case, her family has rejected the Police Investigation Committee headed by Additional Inspector General Sohail Zafar Chattha, describing it as insufficiently independent. In a second letter to Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz Sharif, the family reportedly requested an independent judicial commission.

Serious allegations in Hina Javed case

The family has alleged that important forensic evidence has not been adequately addressed. It claims DNA belonging to Faisal Asghar Imam and his father was found on Hina’s neck and questions whether investigators have properly examined the reported findings.

However, the official forensic report has not been publicly verified through the information available for this report, and the allegation does not establish guilt.

The family has also questioned an initial theft or robbery explanation and alleged that messages were deleted from Hina’s mobile phone before it was handed over to police. It has expressed concern over pending forensic examinations and the investigation’s focus on domestic worker Zeeshan Arshad.

Faisal Asghar Imam and Zeeshan Arshad have reportedly been arrested. The family’s allegations concerning the investigation and the roles of the individuals involved remain subject to verification.

Experts stress evidence preservation

A retired senior police officer told *Minute Mirror* that crime scenes must be secured promptly and that physical evidence, CCTV footage, mobile-phone data, fingerprints and DNA samples should be collected and preserved without delay.

A legal expert said judicial commissions generally conduct fact-finding exercises and make recommendations, while criminal responsibility is determined through the legal process. The powers of any commission depend on its legal mandate.

The experts warned that delays in forensic examinations and unresolved questions about evidence could prolong investigations and weaken public confidence.

Questions for Punjab government

Hina’s family has appealed to the prime minister, Punjab chief minister and army chief to support an independent judicial commission. It has also called for the preservation of digital evidence and the public clarification of forensic findings.

The case raises questions about the status of mobile-phone examinations, the handling of DNA evidence and whether an independent review could address the family’s concerns.

Although the two cases share similarities in the families’ demands, their evidence and circumstances must be assessed separately. Allegations of negligence, evidence suppression or deliberate diversion require independent verification.

The immediate challenge for authorities is to ensure transparent investigations, preserve all available evidence and address the families’ concerns through lawful procedures.

For both families, the central demand remains accountability and credible answers. The progress of the cases will depend on the quality of the evidence, the transparency of the investigations and the courts’ eventual findings.