Police records in Mandi Bahauddin contain no earlier case or complaint against Zeeshan Arshad, the domestic worker whom Rawalpindi police have named as the prime suspect in the murder of 45-year-old Hina Javed. People who knew him in his home area also describe him in terms that differ sharply from the way investigators have portrayed him in public statements.
The investigation team has publicly described Zeeshan, who worked at Hina Javed‘s house, as having criminal tendencies. Police have also alleged that he was involved in illegal and “unnatural” activities. A news team visited his native village in Mandi Bahauddin district to check local records and speak with those who knew him.
Village records and the local police response
A review of the record kept at Miana Gondal police station found no previous case or complaint involving Zeeshan Arshad. Local police did not confirm that any such record existed elsewhere. A local police official told the team that the lack of a previous case does not, on its own, prove that a suspect is innocent.
When the team approached Miana Gondal police, officials at first seemed unaware of the Hina Javed case and later pointed to media reports about it. They said the investigators handling the murder had not contacted them. The team also found no sign that investigators had recorded statements from residents of the village.
It remained unclear how thoroughly the investigation team had examined Zeeshan’s background, or which sources it relied on for its account of his past. The accounts gathered from villagers reflect personal observations, and they do not establish what happened in the murder case.
Residents describe Zeeshan’s character and conduct
Qari Mushtaq, a teacher at the religious seminary where Zeeshan studied for roughly two to two-and-a-half years, said he did not believe Zeeshan had been involved in immoral or unnatural activities. He also said he did not think Zeeshan was capable of such a serious crime.
Anas, a shopkeeper in the local market who said he had known Zeeshan for about five years, acknowledged that Zeeshan had been involved in minor fights and disputes. He rejected the police claim that Zeeshan had sent photographs or videos to friends, saying he had never received any such material from him.
Muhammad Rafiq Bhatti, a retired Pakistan Air Force serviceman who now runs a travel agency, said Zeeshan had worked for him for a considerable time and that he had never received a complaint about his conduct. He said he knew nothing of any involvement in illegal activity and rejected the police allegations. Bhatti added that he did not know the circumstances of the Rawalpindi incident, but he said he had confidence in Zeeshan and his family.
Other villagers gave similar accounts. Muhammad Saleem, a bookshop owner who employed Zeeshan for about a year and a half, called him honest and of good character. Haji Shahbaz, a barber, said Zeeshan was a regular customer with a good temperament. Local councillor Muhammad Mansha said he had never seen any vice or misconduct from Zeeshan and described the family as respectable.
Hiring checks and the police case against Zeeshan
Tasawwar, who arranged Zeeshan’s job at Hina Javed’s house, declined to appear on camera but spoke to the team by phone. He said Zeeshan had been hired about seven months earlier after a background check carried out through Kamil Asghar, the victim’s brother-in-law. According to Tasawwar, the checks also required Zeeshan’s domicile certificate and his father’s national identity card, and he was employed only after they were completed.
Police have named Zeeshan as the prime suspect based on what they describe as his past tendencies and forensic reports. They say he has confessed to several crimes. The forensic reports have not been made public, and the victim’s family has demanded their release. Nearly three months after the murder, police have not yet submitted the challan, the formal charge sheet, to the court.
The findings in the village do not show that the police investigation is wrong, nor do they prove that Zeeshan is innocent. The absence of a prior record does not rule out his involvement in the murder. However, the picture that residents painted differs from the account of his past that police have given publicly, and police have not yet backed that account with publicly released evidence.
