Raza Murder Lawyers clash over Judicial Commission investigation

Advocate Jibran Nasir, counsel for the family of Mir Raza Ali, has rejected claims of distrust in the Judicial Commission investigating the Raza Murder, describing such assertions as “ridiculous”.

Speaking to reporters after a hearing at the City Court on Saturday, Nasir said Mir Raza’s business partner, Ahmed Bharde, had made several revelations during a podcast that he had not shared with the commission.

Nasir said that if Bharde’s claims were accurate, they could help investigators identify those responsible for Mir Raza’s killing. He added that the commission had asked Bharde to submit an application so that he could be summoned to record his statement.

The lawyer also questioned the maintainability of Bharde’s bail application. He said he had maintained from the beginning that the application should be withdrawn because the individuals concerned had not been nominated as accused in the case.

Nasir said the bail proceedings had unnecessarily consumed about a month.

Local Government: Sindh opposition rejects proposed law changes

He welcomed statements made by Bharde and his brother, Abdullah, to the media, saying they could assist the investigation. However, he claimed that contradictions had emerged in some of their statements.

Nasir also rejected claims that witnesses had lost confidence in the investigation. He said Bharde and his brother had repeatedly presented themselves in a manner that placed them in the position of accused persons.

Earlier, Khalid Mumtaz, the lawyer representing Ahmed Bharde, rejected the Judicial Commission and said neither Ahmed nor Abdullah had been named as an accused in the case.

Mumtaz said the two men no longer faced any threat from police and had therefore withdrawn their bail application. He maintained that Ahmed was Mir Raza’s business partner but was not involved in the killing.

He also said his clients had not been given an opportunity to present their position before the commission.

Mumtaz added that his clients would appear if the commission summoned them, but they did not accept its authority in the matter.