MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.---This Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No AC)4-L of 1995 directed against order dated 18-10-1995 of Lahore High Court, Lahore, arises from the facts that Ejaz Ahmed, Muhammad Akram and Allah Ditta petitioners alongwith five others were tried by Judge, Special Court Suppression of Terrorist Activities, Gujranwala under sections 302, 307, 436 and 149, P.P.C., for the triple murder of Inayat, Mumtaz Bibi and Mst. Salina and injuries to Abdul Sattar P.W.; who on the conclusion of the trial, vide his judgment dated 4-2-1991, while acquitting Arif accused convicted the remaining accused and sentenced them as under:---
(i) Under section 302/149, P.P.C.
(a) Muhammad Iqbal Bashir Ahmad, Muhammad Safdar, Shahbaz Ahmed.Death on three counts and a fine of Rs.2,000 each, or in default two months' R.I. each.
(b) Three petitioners Imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.5,000 or in default three months'
R.I. each on three counts.
(ii) under section 436/149, P.P.C. All the accused Seven years' R.I . and a fine of Rs.2,000 each or in default three months' R.I. each.
(iii) Under section 307/149, P.P.C., Ejaz Ahmad Seven years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.5,000 or six months' R.I.
Others Three years' R.I. each and a fine of Rs.2,000 or two months' R.I., each.
2. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the petitioners tiled appeal before the Lahore High Court, Lahore. They filed applications for suspension of execution of sentences. The last application of the petitioners was dismissed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore vide impugned order.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has prayed for the suspension of the execution of the sentences of the petitioners on the ground of inordinate delay of more than 4-1/2 years in disposal of the appeal by the High Court. Learned counsel has argued that although under subsection (2) of section 7 of the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the High Court was obliged to decide appeal of the petitioners within three months yet it has not decided the same despite more than 4-1/2 years have passed after their convictions and sentences by the trial Court.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed this petition.
4. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties with care. We find that the suspension of execution of sentence on the ground of delay alone is not possible in appeal under section 7(1) of the Act. The petitioners stand convicted for triple murder. The case was fixed before the Division Bench of the High Court for hearing but could not be taken up because the learned Bench remained busy in other cases, as stated in paragraph II(i.e) of the petition for leave to appeal at pages 11/12 of the Paper Book. The High Court has already directed the office to fix the case at an early date. Although the delay of 4-1/2 years in disposal of appeal of the petitioners is unfortunate yet the petitioners cannot be released on bail in the peculiar circumstances of this case.
5. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused, and the petition is dismissed.