' The application is moved on behalf of the three applicants, who are brothers inter se and who are alleged to have committed murder of deceased Jamil Asghar.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 21-10-1987 at about 8-15 p.m. The present applicants are alleged to have attacked deceased Jamil Asghar with Dandas and caused injuries to the deceased and one Iftikhar Ellahi who came to his rescue. The incident was witnessed by the complainant who is father of the deceased and P.Ws. Altaf Ellahi, Muhammad Riaz, Masood Ahmed, Syed Nasiruddin, Nasim Qureshi and Bostan Khan. The reason for the attack is said to be that 20-25 days prior to the incident, one of the applicants had blown pressure horn of cycle in front of the house of the complainant, to which the complainant objected. The deceased was taken to Jinnah Hospital, who informed the police on telephone and such entry was made in the Station Diary. F.I.R.
Was registered on 22-10-1987 at 12-50 a.m. Deceased Jamil Asghar died of injuries in the Hospital on 2-11-1987.
3. It is submitted by Mr. Muhammad Akbar learned counsel for the applicants that there is delay of 16 hours in lodging the F.I.R. And furthermore that there was only one injury on the person of deceased and four injuries on the person of injured, one of which is grievous. It is further submitted that no postmortem examination has been conducted on the dead body of the deceased, who died on 2-11-1987.
4. So far only the complainant has been examined. Mr. Mian Khan Malik learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that other witnesses could not be examined, because the police file is in the High Court due to this bail application. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the case did not proceed, because the jail authorities did not produce the accused before the Court.
5. Be that as it may, the, case has proceeded and Mr. Mian Khan Malik undertakes to produce other witnesses before the Court, on the next date of hearing. The incident is a day time murder and there are seven eye-witnesses. Though the names of three witnesses do not appear in the F.I.R. Still their evidence cannot be ignored. The names of four witnesses including one injured person, do transpire in the F.I.R. No doubt there is only one injury on the person of deceased, but there are more than one injuries on the person of injured Iftekhar Ellahi and the applicants are facing trial under section 302/34, P.P.C. In my opinion at this stage, it cannot be said that there are no reasonable grounds to hold that the accused are not guilty of the alleged offence. However, as nearly one year has passed, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the case without any further delay within six months. With these directions the application is dismissed.