1. It is contended that vide order dated 31-5-2001 this Court had directed the trial Court for early disposal of the case. Accordingly on 28-8-2001 the learned trial Court framed the charge against the applicant and bifurcated the case of the absconding accused. The counsel contends that right from the date i.e, 13-9-2001 the process of summons, B.Ws. and N.B.Ws. is being issued against the P.Ws. but none of them. have turned up except the complainant who appeared on a single date and being a lady her absence was excused. The counsel submits that till today only Medical Officer has been examined, with no further progress in the case.
2. Mr. Sher Muhammad Shar, learned A.A.-G. appearing for the State has opposed the bail plea on the ground that the applicant is not entitled to bail on merits of the case as he is alleged to have fired at the deceased.
3. The only ground being pressed by the applicant's counsel and worth consideration is the conduct of the prosecution witnesses who have evidently kept themselves away for more than a year by making the process of N.B.Ws. ineffective for service by police. In my view this ground alone would suffice to entitle the applicant to his release on bail. Accordingly, the applicant is released on bail subject to his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs,4,00,000 (four lacs) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.