Three senior Karachi police officers have submitted their replies to the judicial commission probing the Mir Raza case, with one of them firmly denying that the family was ever shown a smartwatch presentation.
Additional Inspector General Azad Khan told the commission that no such presentation was made to the bereaved family. His reply addresses one of the specific questions the commission had put to the police about how the family was briefed during the investigation.
Admissions of lapses in the probe
While Azad Khan denied the smartwatch claim, the replies of two other senior officers acknowledged shortcomings in the handling of the case.
Deputy Inspector General Aamir Farooqi admitted there had been disorganisation in preserving the body and the scene, a concession that goes to the heart of the commission’s inquiry into whether the investigation was handled properly from the start.
DIG Farrukh Ali Lanjar, in his reply, said he had not been informed about the missing report or the delay in registering the FIR. His statement raises questions about communication within the police hierarchy during the critical early days of the case.
The three replies were filed before the judicial commission that is examining the circumstances of the case. The commission had earlier concluded its proceedings, and these responses form part of the record it will consider.
Why the Mir Raza judicial commission matters
Judicial commissions are formed when public confidence in an investigation needs an independent anchor. In this case, the commission’s questions to the police, from the alleged smartwatch presentation to the preservation of evidence, show it is testing the investigation step by step rather than taking the official account at face value.
The admission of disorganisation in preserving the body and scene is particularly significant. In any death investigation, the first hours determine what evidence survives. Farooqi’s acknowledgement gives the commission a documented admission from inside the force itself.
Lanjar’s statement about not being informed of the missing report or FIR delay points to a parallel problem: even where individual officers may have acted, the chain of information within the department appears to have broken down.
What remains unanswered
The commission will now weigh these replies against the rest of the evidence before it. Key questions that remain include why the FIR was delayed, what happened to the missing report, and whether the family’s account of the smartwatch presentation can be reconciled with Azad Khan’s denial.
For the family, the replies offer partial answers but not closure. A denial here and an admission there still leave the central question of the commission’s inquiry: whether the investigation into the death was conducted fairly and thoroughly.
The case continues to be watched closely in Karachi, where questions about police investigations carry weight beyond any single incident. Earlier, the Peshawar High Court acquitted a police inspector in a separate case, while the Supreme Court barred traffic wardens’ transfer into a new cadre, keeping police administration in the headlines.
Read the original reporting in The Express Tribune.
Frequently asked questions
What did the police tell the Mir Raza judicial commission?
Three senior officers filed replies: Additional IG Azad Khan denied showing the family a smartwatch presentation, DIG Aamir Farooqi admitted disorganisation in preserving the body and scene, and DIG Farrukh Ali Lanjar said he was not informed of the missing report or FIR delay.
What is the Mir Raza judicial commission?
It is the judicial inquiry examining the circumstances of the Mir Raza case and the conduct of the police investigation.
What happens next in the case?
The commission will consider the officers’ replies alongside the rest of the evidence as it finalises its findings.
