Civil and criminal proceedings can run simultaneously, and the possibility of conflicting decisions in the civil and criminal courts cannot be considered as a relevant consideration for stay of the proceedings.

JUDGMENT

Vikram Aggarwal, J. - Challenge in the present revision petition, preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 10.10.2022 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Phul (District Bathinda) vide which the application filed by the petitioner (Annexure P-3) for stay of proceedings of the civil suit titled as 'Ritika Vs. Subhash Kumar' was rejected.

2. One Vijay Kumar, who was the father of respondents No.1 and 2 committed suicide on 20.01.2011. FIR No.10 dated 20.12.2011 was registered under Section 306 IPC at Police Station City Rampura, in which the petitioner and respondents No.3 to 7 were arrayed as accused. They were alleged to have abetted the suicide of Vijay Kumar. Vijay Kumar was married to one Parveen Rani, daughter of the present petitioner. From the said marriage, three children i.e. respondents No.1 and 2 and one son namely Gur Parshad were born. Gur Parshad is stated to be in the custody of his mother Parveen Rani. The allegation was that the present petitioner and the other accused used to harass Vijay Kumar. The petitioner was the father-in-law of Vijay Kumar whereas respondents No.3 and 4 were his brothers-in-law and further respondents No.5 to 7 were known to the petitioner.

3. A civil suit (Annexure P-1) was filed by respondents No.1 and 2 against the present petitioner and respondents No.3 to 7 for recovery of ^30,00,000/- as compensation on account of the death of Vijay Kumar.

4. During the pendency of the said suit, an application was filed by the present petitioner (Annexure P-3) for stay of the proceedings of the suit till the decision in the criminal case i.e. SC/222/2013 pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda. It was averred in the application that since both the cases were based upon same facts and same cause of action and both related to the issue of death of Vijay Kumar and further since the civil suit had been filed subsequent to the registration of the FIR, the proceedings of the civil suit should be stayed. It was also averred that decisions of Civil Courts are binding on Criminal Courts and both cases should be decided simultaneously. It was also averred that precedence would be given to the criminal proceedings.

5. This application was dismissed by way of the impugned order dated 10.10.2022 leading to the filing of the present revision petition.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the paper book.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable. It was submitted that if the proceedings in the civil suit are permitted to be continued, the defence of the petitioner and respondents No.3 to 7 would be disclosed, which would be to the prejudice of the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner had not examined any witness in the defendant evidence in the civil case on purpose because the moment the witnesses would be examined in defendant evidence, the defence of the accused would be disclosed. Learned counsel submitted that in the criminal case, compensation could also be awarded and, therefore, even otherwise, the suit is premature. Learned counsel contended that the trial Court did not consider the matter from the correct perspective and dismissed the application filed by the petitioner on flimsy grounds. In support of his contentions, learned counsel placed reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Case No.281 of 1951 and Cri. Misc. Petn. No.349 of 1951 titled as M.S. Sheriff and another Vs. State of Madras and others, Docid # IndiaLawLib/283045, Civil Appeal No.4751 of 2008 titled as D. Purushotama Reddy and Anr. Vs. K. Sateesh, 2008 RCR (Criminal) 660 and Civil Appeal Nos.244 and 245 of 1958 titled as Sri Sinha Ramanuja Jeer alias Sri Vanamamalai Ramanuja Jeer Swamigal Vs. Sri Ranga Ramanuja Jeer alias Emberumanar Jeer and others, Docid # IndiaLawLib/290745 as well as a judgment passed by the Orissa High Court in Civil