The bench was hearing some identical petitions challenging the joint investigation team constituted to probe Sahiwal incident and seeking formation of judicial commission into the matter. The proceedings were adjourned to February 14.
The chief justice asked a member of the victim family, Jailil, also the petitioner, that he (CJ) was willing to pass an order for a judicial inquiry into the matter as the formation of a judicial commission is not under the court's domain. The CJ observed that a judicial inquiry could be made part of the case but a judicial commission could not be treated as so. However, the petitioner sought time to consult his lawyer.
The CJ when asked the lawyer to present the names of eyewitnesses, he replied how an affected family could search the eyewitnesses. The eyewitnesses are being watched on TV channels and their videos are being uploaded on social media. At this, the CJ remarked it is tantamount to ruining the case if you will rely on these evidences. However, the lawyer said Umair Khalil, son of deceased Khalil, is their important eyewitness and the CJ directed to record his statement.
A law officer told the court that the accused persons involved in Sahiwal shootout were at physical remand. He also told the court that the statement of Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI) Muhammad Abbas was recorded.
On a point of formation of judicial commission, a lawyer representing the federal government implored the court that Prime Minister Imran Khan has sought report from the Punjab government over Sahiwla incident, adding if the report could not satisfy the PM, then the formation of judicial commission will be considered.
The Additional Attorney General told the court that members of the victim family did not request the PM Khan for formation of a judicial commission. The CJ wondered: "Is it essential that only affected member will submit the application?"
On a point, the court asked how many people have recorded their statements so far. The court also asked about the status of statements of eyewitnesses. The law officer admitted that no eyewitness has been recorded yet. However, he told the court that CCTV footage was sent to forensic lab.
Meanwhile, the counsel for deceased Zishan also submitted the list of witnesses and the CJ directed the JIT to call them and record their statements.
The petitioner Jalil in his petition contended that a false FIR has been registered after the fake encounter portraying the victims of the incident as terrorists. However, another FIR was lodged against the personnel of the Counter Terrorism Department (CTD) against the brutal killings of innocent persons.
He stated that even in the second FIR the facts have been distorted to give margin to the real culprits to escape conviction. Jalil contended that no recovery has been made so far from the arrested personnel of the CTD which reflects apathy on the part of JIT. He stated that the JIT has also even failed to provide him a copy of police file despite repeated requests.
He argued for formation of a judicial commission owing to non-seriousness of the government and to provide justice to the victims.