Mir Raza autopsy under scrutiny: Fresh discrepancies surface before judicial commission

KARACHI: Fresh questions have emerged over the post-mortem examination of Mir Raza, with Police Surgeon Dr Summaiya Syed telling a judicial commission that key details were missing from the autopsy report and that the reported bullet entry and exit wounds appeared inconsistent.

The hearing, being conducted by Sindh High Court Justice Umar Sial, was unexpectedly adjourned after Sindh Advocate General Javed Dero intervened while lawyer Jibran Nasir, representing Raza’s family, was questioning Dr Summaiya.

Justice Sial expressed displeasure over the intervention and directed that Sindh Home Minister Ziaul Hassan Lanjar be issued a notice to appear before the commission at 9am on Thursday.

During the proceedings, the investigating officer submitted Raza’s post-mortem report, forensic findings from his mobile phone and smartwatch, and witness statements recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Dr Summaiya, who appeared before the commission along with medical board chief Professor Naseem Ahmed, explained the procedures followed for identifying bodies and conducting medico-legal examinations. She said unidentified bodies undergo DNA sampling, while photographs are taken in accordance with a high court ruling.

She also explained that a medico-legal certificate is issued before a post-mortem and that police documentation under Section 174 of the CrPC is required before the examination can take place.

The commission questioned Dr Summaiya about the involvement of a sweeper during Raza’s autopsy, based on a statement by Dr Usama. She denied that a sweeper had assisted him, saying the individual present was laboratory assistant Shoaib Rashid, who had received training to assist with post-mortems.

Dr Summaiya said JPMC handles around 15 to 18 post-mortems each day, making it impractical for her to personally attend every examination. However, she said she directly supervised high-profile and suspicious cases.

A major development came when the commission questioned her about her communications with Dr Usama following Raza’s death.

According to Dr Summaiya, she spoke to Dr Usama on July 29 after he informed her that a two-day-old body had been brought from Jauhar. She questioned him about the victim’s identity, medical history and bullet wounds. He subsequently sent her photographs of portions of the post-mortem register.

She said she later asked specifically for evidence of the bullet’s exit wound. Dr Usama initially told her that the bullet had entered through the chest and exited through the back, but allegedly said he did not have a photograph showing the exit wound.

After further requests, he eventually sent her a crime-scene photograph on July 31. Dr Summaiya told the commission that Dr Usama claimed he had obtained the photograph by paying someone a bribe. She said the image appeared to show a mark on Raza’s back.

Dr Summaiya further testified that she discovered on August 1 that the post-mortem report had already been submitted. She said she informed Dr Usama that several significant observations had been left out and asked him to meet her so the omissions could be addressed.

She also told the commission that the documented bullet entry and exit wounds did not match. Dr Usama later told her he had made a note of the matter “for safety”, according to her testimony.

Dr Summaiya said the report had not been forwarded to her for review and that Dr Usama had completed it independently, leaving her to forward it afterward.

She also told the commission that Dr Usama later acknowledged being nervous during the examination and said he would document the reasons behind his findings in future. Dr Summaiya said the problem, in her view, was not a lack of documentation but what she described as “overconfidence”.

The commission also examined the condition of Raza’s body. Dr Summaiya said the body was decomposed, but its condition had not been adequately documented in the report.

Justice Sial also questioned the handling of samples, noting that the report stated they had been handed over to a police official. Dr Summaiya said samples were preserved separately and warned that delays in examination could increase the risk of evidence being compromised, particularly in sensitive and high-profile cases.

The hearing became tense toward the end when Raza family’s counsel continued questioning Dr Summaiya, prompting the intervention by the Sindh advocate general and the subsequent adjournment.