Mir Raza Ali: Judicial commission says SSP Samiullah Soomro ‘destroyed’ the case

KARACHI: A judicial commission investigating the murder of young entrepreneur Mir Raza Ali on Thursday strongly criticised SSP Special Investigation Unit Samiullah Soomro over alleged lapses in the investigation, including the burning of the crime scene and handling of key evidence.

The one-member commission, headed by Sindh High Court (SHC) Justice Omar Sial, conducted a hearing into the case, during which the head of the first investigation team in the case, SSP Samiullah Soomro, appeared before the commission.

During the proceedings, Justice Sial questioned the SSP about the circumstances in which the crime scene was set on fire.

“You had the crime scene burned?” the judge asked.

SSP Soomro replied that he had tasked a sub-inspector with searching for bullet casings; however, the team later informed him that dense bushes had made the search difficult.

The SSP identified police officer Ghaus, who had set fire to the crime scene, adding that another team, headed by ASP Ashar, was sent to the site the next day and recovered bullet casings.

The judge questioned whether setting fire to a crime scene was part of police protocol.

“No, sir,” Soomro replied.

Justice Sial referred to previous cases, including Benazir Bhutto case and her brother Murtaza Bhutto case, in which crime scenes had been compromised, expressing concern that the same had happened in the Mir Raza case.

“Now Mir Raza’s crime scene has also been burned. Soomro, you too appear suspicious,” the judge remarked.

SSP Soomro told the commission that he had not instructed anyone to set the crime scene on fire.

The judge criticised the investigation, saying, “Because of you, the entire case has been destroyed.”

Mir Raza Ali Case: No action against police officers destroyed investigation, says Jibran Nasir

Justice Sial said that the mistakes in such a sensitive case raised questions.

The commission also questioned whether deliberately weak investigation officers had been assigned to the case.

According to the commission, investigators had stated that 23 of the 33 statements in the case were recorded by someone other than the designated investigation officer, who only signed them.

The commission questioned who had recorded the statements and whether the procedure was lawful.

Soomro admitted that the investigation officer should have recorded statements himself.

The commission also questioned whether pressure had been exerted on the investigation.

“When an officer like you does such things, it gives the impression that there is some pressure, but you are not confessing this,” the commission observed.

The commission also raised questions about the handling of Mir Raza’s mobile phone and the narrative surrounding its recovery.

According to the commission, a video had been provided to the media showing Mir Raza allegedly throwing something away. The commission questioned why the media had been told that the video showed him throwing his mobile phone.

The commission further questioned why, after the phone was recovered from a drain, a narrative was developed that it had been found near a wedding hall.

Justice Omar Sial also questioned why the police had not corrected the narrative portraying the incident as a suicide.

SSP Soomro told the commission that the mobile phone had already been sent to the Counter Terrorism Department (CTD) before he assumed charge of the investigation.

The commission expressed concern over the handling of what it described as important evidence.

It also asked whether the police officers had themselves blocked the phone during the attempt to unlock it.

Soomro said his team had made no such attempt, while adding that it was possible the CTD had tried to unlock the device.

The body of 25-year-old businessman Mir Raza Ali was found in Karachi’s Gulistan-i-Jauhar on July 29, a day after he went missing.

Earlier, lawyer Jibran Nasir, representing Mir Raza’s family, had accused the police and the provincial government of failing to properly investigate the case and alleged that officials who compromised the investigation had not faced action.

Speaking after a court hearing, Nasir alleged that the authorities’ objective appeared to be to protect those responsible for the killing.

He further alleged that officers who attempted to prevent this were being suspended or removed from their positions.