SHC rejects plea for JIT in Mir Raza murder case

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) has rejected a petition seeking the formation of a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) to investigate the death of Mir Raza Ali, the owner of dessert brand Wafflix.

The petition was filed by Raza’s family, which raised concerns over the handling of the investigation. The family alleged that important evidence had been mishandled or destroyed and that CCTV footage had not been properly preserved.

The family, represented by lawyer Jibran Nasir, argued that the alleged shortcomings raised questions about the credibility of the ongoing investigation. It requested the court to order an independent and multidisciplinary JIT.

The Sindh government opposed the petition. Its representatives told the court that a judicial commission had already been established to examine the circumstances surrounding Raza’s death.

The SHC had reserved its decision earlier after the investigating officer appeared before the court. The officer told the court that investigators had concluded that the case involved murder rather than suicide.

In its written order, the court noted the investigating officer’s assurance that the investigation would be completed in accordance with the law. The officer also said assistance could be obtained from other investigative and law-enforcement agencies if required.

The court directed the relevant authorities to ensure that the investigation was conducted impartially, fairly and without unnecessary delay.

The SHC also observed that the family could use other legal remedies available to them if they believed the investigation was not transparent or fair.

During the proceedings, the court questioned whether it had the authority to supervise an ongoing police investigation or direct the formation of a JIT.

Public prosecutors argued that the court should not interfere with an investigation that was still in progress. They pointed out that police had not yet submitted the challan in the case.

After hearing the arguments, the court dismissed the petition and directed the investigating officer to complete the investigation in a transparent and timely manner.

Following the decision, Nasir said the family would challenge the ruling. He maintained that the petition had not asked the court to determine who killed Raza or establish criminal responsibility.

According to the lawyer, the family had instead sought judicial review of what it described as documented failures in the investigation. He argued that these failures should have been examined to determine whether they justified an independent JIT.

Nasir also maintained that there was a distinction between a constitutional court directly supervising a police investigation and reviewing whether an investigation had potentially been compromised.

He further argued that some evidence, if lost or destroyed during an investigation, might never be recovered later. Therefore, he said, waiting until the conclusion of the investigation could make any eventual legal remedy ineffective.