Judge criticises Mir Raza’s business partner for concealing facts

Judge criticises Mir Raza's business partner for concealing facts.

Key points

• Ishaq Tanoli Published September 4, 2026 Updated September 4, 2026 07: 03am.
• Ishaq Tanoli is a Karachi-based reporter for Dawn with over 20 years of experience covering judicial and electoral affairs.
• Abdullah Bhardey deposed that his brother and the victim owned Wafflix and he was associated as a vendor with the firm since he was supplying chocolate.
• Initially, Bhardey informed the commission that only he and the victim had equal partnership in the business.
• The commission additionally recorded the testimonies of Bhardey's brother, a cab driver and a police officer.

Ishaq Tanoli Published September 4, 2026 Updated September 4, 2026 07: 03am. Join our Whatsapp Channel. Add Dawn as a trusted source.

KARACHI: While recording testimony of victim's business partner, the judicial commission formed to investigate the circumstances and feasible negligence in the Mir Raza Ali murder case on Thursday expressed resentment towards him for attempting to mislead the commission and concealing facts concerning the case.

Meanwhile, the one-member commission headed by Justice Omar Sial of the Sindh High Court grilled Muhammad Ahmed Bhardey for over two hours and deplored that he seemed to be more interested in securing his financial and business interests instead of bothering regarding the well-being of his childhood friend after he had gone missing.

Notably, the friend additionally asserted that their eatery Wafflix was doing well, but the aggrieved family was facing financial matters due to losses sustained by the victim's father and Raza was worried since the creditors were harassing the complainant.

In practice, the commission additionally recorded the testimonies of Bhardey's brother, a cab driver and a police officer. Judicial commission records testimony in murder probe.

In practice, the business partner testified that he had a personal and professional relationship with the victim and both were old friends as they had studied at school and college together.

He additionally deposed that they had set up the business in 2020 and on the night of July 28, he along with his elder brother Abdullah had visited the victim's house and they along with some other friends had searched the room of Raza so as to find any clue concerning his whereabouts.

He further asserted that the deceased's smart watch, keys, a packet of cigarettes along with narcotics and other articles were discovered in the room and the victim's sister had assisted them decode the smart watch.

When the commission asked whether he had obtained the partnership deed from the room, Bhardey contended that the deed was registered in 2021 and he had obtained the same from the victim in 2024 after the Sindh Board of Revenue had issued them a notice concerning non-registration and since then the original partnership deed had been with him as there was no copy of such document.

"I had asked the sister of victim to send a mail to Foodpanda asking it to transfer the weekly payment of their eatery (Rs600, 000 to Rs800, 000) to my account instead of victim on the night of July 28 while two notes were found in the smart watch of deceased one related to details of creditors and other said that the victim was looking to borrow Rs30 million."

For context, the bench additionally inquired as to why his email and phone number were being employed by the victim to login to his (deceased) iCloud, Bhardey merely replied that since they were highly good and old friends.

When the commission further asked him whether it was not odd that he was more concerned regarding payment/capital shortly after his business partner and old friend had gone missing. He contended that initially, he did not take it seriously since the victim had gone missing last year as well and then returned home.

For context, the business partner additionally stated he came to know on July 28 morning that the pistol of a security guard, kept at one of their eatery's branches, was missing and the footage indicated the deceased was leaving the branch with the weapon and he had informed the family concerning such footage.

Responding to another query, he further asserted that their eatery was not facing any financial constraint, but Raza's family was in fiscal crisis after losses in his father's business and he was worried since individuals were harassing and demanding the return of the borrowed capital as his parents had additionally sold their various assets.

"Various lenders, from whom Raza or his family borrowed money, had contacted me after Raza had gone missing while the victim had also invested two to three million rupees in the crypto trading, " he continued.

Initially, Bhardey informed the commission that only he and the victim had equal partnership in the business. Nevertheless, the commission had shown him a copy of another agreement which reflected that one Ahsan Anis Shamsi had additionally a 30 per cent partnership in the eatery.

Thereafter, he conceded the same and additionally went on that two brothers Asif and Abid had additionally invested 10.5 million while he had asked Raza to keep the payment of Rs5 million produced by Shamsi.

Notably, the commission expressed serious resentment towards him for not offering satisfactory replies and observed that he did not bother to follow up with the victim over an amount of Rs5 million, but seemed wor an amount of Rs5 million, but seemed worried concerning Rs600, 000 shortly after his business partner had gone missing.

Justice Sial additionally came down hard on Bhardey for attempting to mislead the commission and conceal the facts related to the case while the commission further expressed its displeasure with his counsel for interfering in the proceedings.

When asked why he had obtained interim pre-arrest bail despite the fact that police have yet to name anybody as accused in the case, he asserted that the family of victim was pointing finger at him while the police had additionally detained him for 36 hours.

He mainly endorsed the statement of his younger brother and admitted that he was additionally present when the victim's room was searched and secured details regarding two notes identified in the smart watch.

He additionally deposed that the victim lastly talked to him on phone at 2: 30am on July 28, assured him that he (victim) will clear his payment as well as capital of two other vendors.

Ehsanullah testified that he was a driver of a car, provided by ride hailing service Bykea, and had picked Raza near Khalid Bin Waleed Road at 4: 09am on July 28 and dropped him at the destination in Block I, Gulistan-I-Jauhar, on 4: 28am. According to He additionally, the victim was using his mobile and additionally played a song during the journey, but did not talk much apart from asking the driver to speed up and take the shortest feasible route.

Nevertheless, he complained to the commission that the landlord has thrown him out of his rented house and ride hailing firm has additionally taken back the vehicle from him due to this case.

"I am jobless now and left with no option but to stay at the police station, " he continued.

Thereafter, the commission issued directives to the investigating officer of the case to take such problems with the landlord and ride hailing business and addressed the same as well as to ensure that no coercive action be taken against the driver.

DSP Arshad Afridi deposed that he along with the SHO Ferozabad on the night between July 30 and July 31 had visited the house of the victim to collect information and denied that he had asked anything regarding possibility of suicide to the aggrieved family.

He conceded that the SHO had shown a clip to the family in which the weapon was seen in the victim's hand.

Notably, the commission additionally issued a show-cause notice to MLO Dr Osama Sheikh with direction to file reply in seven days after some journalists complained that some persons accompanying the MLO at the last hearing had snatched mobile phone of one of their colleagues when he attempted to speak to the MLO on the premises of the SHC. Published in Dawn, September 4th, 2026.

Ishaq Tanoli is a Karachi-based reporter for Dawn with over 20 years of experience covering judicial and electoral affairs. As well as election matters, his reporting focuses on the proceedings of the Supreme Court and Sindh High Court. He can be discovered on X at @ishaqtanolihotm.

In short, judge criticises Mir Raza's business partner for concealing facts is the central thread here, and readers can expect follow-up reporting as the picture becomes clearer.