Mir Raza’death was murder, not suicide, judicial commission finds; recommends high-powered JIT

The Sindh government has made public the judicial commission’s report into the death of entrepreneur Mir Raza Ali, with the commission

KARACHI: The Sindh government has made public the judicial commission’s report into the death of entrepreneur Mir Raza Ali, with the commission concluding that the case should be treated as murder rather than suicide and recommending a high-powered Joint Investigation Team (JIT) to establish the facts and restore public confidence.

The commission has proposed that the JIT be headed by DIG Irfan Baloch, with representatives from the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Intelligence Bureau (IB), Pakistan Rangers Sindh and the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA)

Contradictory Police Conclusions Raised Concerns

The report criticised the investigation for initially treating Mir Raza’s death as suicide before subsequently describing it as murder. According to the commission, the conflicting conclusions seriously undermined public confidence in the police investigation.

It observed that even if investigators eventually reach the correct conclusion, public acceptance may remain difficult because trust has already been damaged. The commission therefore considered a JIT involving multiple agencies essential to establish the facts, address public concerns and dispel speculation surrounding the case.

Commission Examined 50 Witnesses

Established under the Sindh Tribunals of Inquiry Ordinance, 1969, the commission began its proceedings on August 27, 2026, and continued its work until October 7. During 20 sessions, it recorded statements from 50 witnesses, including family members, friends, business associates, investors and police officials.

The commission also visited the crime scene on October 5, while all its sessions were kept open to the public.

Mir Raza, an Institute of Business Administration (IBA) graduate and founder of WeFlix, had left his residence in Karachi’s PECHS area during the early hours of July 28.

Investigation Faced Serious Criticism

The report identified several shortcomings in the police investigation, stating that investigators had announced conclusions before completing a thorough examination of the evidence.

The commission questioned the reliance on a limited number of unverified text messages and selected video recordings to support the initial suicide theory. It also highlighted the absence of a proper investigation into possible blackmail, coercion or abetment.

The possibility that relevant facts had been concealed could not be ruled out, the report stated. It recommended examining the conduct of officers involved during the first 10 days of the investigation.

The commission further called for immediate departmental inquiries, criminal proceedings against officers found negligent and a public acknowledgment of the police’s shortcomings, accompanied by an apology.

Medical Evidence and Post-Mortem Discrepancies

The report highlighted contradictions between the initial and subsequent post-mortem examinations. It questioned the interpretation of the bullet wound and stated that the reported bullet trajectory and characteristics of the injury were inconsistent with the suicide theory.

The commission also identified the reported absence of blood, acid burn marks on the body and the presence of sedative substances in blood as significant findings requiring investigation. These findings, according to the report, raised serious questions about the circumstances surrounding Mir Raza’s death.

CCTV Evidence Collection Question

The commission described the collection of surveillance footage as a major investigative failure. At least nine possible routes connected to the crime scene, with approximately 52 CCTV cameras installed in the surrounding area. However, police reportedly obtained footage only from the road along which Mir Raza had travelled.

The commission recommended that the JIT examine intelligence inputs and reassess the available evidence to determine what happened. It said a transparent, multi-agency investigation was necessary to establish accountability, address the family’s concerns and restore public trust in the case.