Advocates:
H.J.Umrigar, K.RAJAH IYER, M.S.K.AIYANGAR, R.Ganapathy Iyer, S.Subramania Iyer

Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:

• The Supreme Court of India held that an appeal lies under Section 476-B of the Criminal Procedure Code from an order of a Division Bench of the High Court directing the filing of a complaint for perjury, as the High Court is deemed subordinate to the Supreme Court under the definition in Section 195(3). (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
• The Court clarified that the term "ordinarily" in Section 195(3) refers to the ordinary appellate forum for appealable decrees or sentences of the former court, not the general existence of a right of appeal to the Supreme Court. (!) (!) (!)
• In determining whether to stay a civil suit pending the disposal of a criminal case on the same facts, the only relevant consideration is the likelihood of embarrassment to the accused. (!)
• The Court ruled that criminal proceedings should generally take precedence over civil suits to ensure swift and sure justice, as civil suits often drag on for years and criminal justice requires prompt action while memories are fresh. (!)
• However, this is not a hard and fast rule; special considerations in a specific case, such as a civil suit being near its conclusion, might justify not staying it, but in this instance, the civil suits were stayed. (!) (!)
• The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and the petition for special leave, ordering that Civil Suits Nos. 311 to 314 of 1951 be stayed until the conclusion of the prosecution under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code. (!) (!)