SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1987 Supreme(P&H) 85

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
I.S. Tiwana, J.
Shiv Kumar Gupta - Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
Crl. Misc. No. 7022-M of 1986.
Decided On : 3 February, 1987

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.K. Pipat, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. I.S. Rai, Advocate for the State, Mr. O.P. Hoshiarpuri, Advocate for General Manager, Kharar Textile Mills.

The court can stay criminal proceedings pending the finalization of rights in a civil court case involving the same subject matter.

Headnote:

Quashing - F.I.R. - Stay of Criminal Prosecution

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash the F.I.R. registered against them under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. The disputed property was subject to ongoing litigation in the civil court, and the fate of the criminal case depended on the findings of the civil court.

Finding of the Court:

The court decided to stay the further investigation or the launching of criminal prosecution until the rights of the parties in the civil court were finalized.

Issues: Quashing of F.I.R., Interplay between Civil and Criminal Proceedings

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that it would be in the interest of justice to stay the criminal proceedings until the civil court's judgment on the disputed property was reached.

Final Decision: The petition for quashing the F.I.R. was disposed of, and the court ordered the stay of further investigation or criminal prosecution until the rights of the parties in the civil court were finalized.


ORDER

I.S. Tiwana, J.- In this petition for the quashing of the F.I.R. No. 91, dated August 30, 1986, registered against the petitioner under sections 447, 427, 379 and 506, Indian Penal Code, in Police Station, Kharar, I need rot go into the detailed facts for the simple reason that the parties are already litigating in the Court of Sub Judge 1st Class, kharar in Case No. 412 of 28.8.1935 with regard to their claims to the disputed property. The said Court has already granted a temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs, i.e. respondent No. 2, vide order dated August 28, 1986 (Annexure P. 5). It is also not disputed that the fate of the criminal case registered against the petitioner would depend upon the findings of the civil court with regard to the possession of the disputed property wherefrom the petitioner is alleged to have cut and removed certain euclalyptus trees, on August 27, 1986, i. e only a day prior to the filing of the above noted suit.

2. In the light of the facts and circumstances noted above, I deem it proper that instead of quashing the F.I.R. at this stage, the interest of justice would be better served if further investigation into the matter by the police or the launching of the criminal prosecution against the petitioner is stayed till the finalisation or crystalisation of the rights of the parties in the light of the judgment of the civil Court. I order accordingly. The petition thus stands disposed of.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top