Himachal Pradesh High Court
Surender Kumar Sain vs . The State Of H.P. Along With Connected ... on 30 May, 2024
1 Surender Kumar Sain Vs. The State of H.P. along with connected matter .
Cr. Revision No. 5 of 2022 along with Cr.
Revision No. 150 of 2022.
Cr. Revision No. 5 of 2022 30.05.2024 Present: Mr. Ajay Kochhar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Satish Sharma, Advocate, for the applicant/ petitioner.
Mr. Mohinder Zhuraik, Additional Advocate General for respondent/State.
r Cr. Revision No. 150 of 2022.
Ms. Vandana Kuthiala and Ms. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Mohinder Zhuraik, Additional Advocate Generalfor respondent/State.
Cr.MP No.210 of 2024 in Cr. Revision No. 150 of 2022 Cr.MP No. 1487 of2024 in Cr. Revision No. 5 of 2022 The applicant(s)/Petitioners(s) have filed the present applications for staying the proceedings pending before the learned Special Judge, Sirmour at Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P. It has been asserted that the Court was pleased to vacate the orders of staying the further proceedings in case ST No. 9-CC/7 of 2007 titled as State of H.P. vs. Satinder Mohan and others, pending before the learned Special Judge, Sirmour at Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P. in both the cases on 06.12.2023 by placing the reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (P) Ltd. vs CBI (2018) 16 SCC 299. This judgment has been ::: Downloaded on - 30/05/2024 20:37:00 :::CIS 2 overruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Courtof India in High .
Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs State of U.P. andothers, 2024 SCC Online SC 207. The very purpose of filing the application(s) shall be defeated in case the evidence is allowed to continue. Therefore, prayers were made for staying the proceedings pending before learned Special
2.
r to Judge, Sirmour at Nahan.
No reply to the application(s) have been filed.
3. I have heard Mr. Ajay Kochhar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Satish Sharma, Advocate, for the applicant/petitoiner in Cr.MP No. 1487 of 2024 in Cr.
Revision No. 5 of 2022, Ms. Vandana Kuthiala and Mr. Diwan Singh, Advocates for the applicant/petitioner in Cr.MP No. 210 of 2024 in Cr. Revision No. 150 of 2023 and Mr Mohinder Zhuraik, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State in both the applications.
4. Mr. Ajay Kochhar, learned Senior counselfor the applicant/petitoner in Cr.MP No. 1487 of 2024 in Cr.
Revision No. 5 of 2022 and Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, learned counsel for the petitioner in Cr.MP No. 210 of 2024 in Cr.
Revision No. 150 of 2022 submitted that the Court had vacated the stay order(s) passed in the respective cases in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (P) Ltd's case (supra), which has ::: Downloaded on - 30/05/2024 20:37:00 :::CIS 3 been overruled by the judgment passed in High Court Bar .
Association Allahabad's case (supra). Subsequently, the matter was listed for arguments and the arguments were addressed. The arguments could not be concluded due to the circumstances beyond the control of the applicants/ petitioner(s) in both the petitions. The record is required for the disposal of the revisions and the very purpose of filing the revision(s) would be defeated in case the proceedings are permitted to continue. The applicant(s)/petitioner(s) have a good prima facie case in their favour; therefore, they prayed that the applications be allowed and the order dated 06.12.2023 be recalled.
5. Mr. Mohinder Zhuraik, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State submitted that the petitioner(s) failed to address the arguments for about 2 years; therefore, there is no infirmity in the order passed by this Court. He prayed that the present applications be dismissed.
6. I have given considerable thought to the submissions at the bar and have gone through the records carefully.
7. A perusal of the order dated 06.12.2023 shows that the Court had vacated the stay orders dated 06.01.2022/31.03.2022 passed in both the petitions simply ::: Downloaded on - 30/05/2024 20:37:00 :::CIS 4 because a period of six months had elapsed since the .
issuance of the stay order in compliance with the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (P) Ltd's case (supra). However, this judgment was overruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in High Court Bar Association Allahabad's case (supra) and it was held that a direction could not have been issued to automatically vacate the stay. The Courts cannot dispose of the cases due to huge pendency and the interim order cannot be vacated by the High Court without giving sufficient opportunity to be heard.
If any party is aggrieved by the interim order, it has a right to apply for vacation of the stay.
8. In view of the binding precedent, it is not permissible to vacate the stay simply because of the lapse of time. Since the judgment passed in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (P) Ltd's case (supra) has been overruled by the Hon'ble Supreme, hence, the order passed on 06.12.2023 is liable to be recalled.
9. The matter was heard at length on 28.02.2024 and adjourned for continuation on 05.03.2024 when it was not taken. This shows that the applicant(s)/petitioner(s) were not at fault. The pleas taken by the applicants/ revisionists that the proceedings could not have been initiated under the Indian Penal Code after the offence ::: Downloaded on - 30/05/2024 20:37:00 :::CIS 5 punishable under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act .
was compounded is supported by Syed Yaqoob Syed Masood vs State of Maharashtra through P.I.City Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad and another 2018 SCC Online Bom 179. Hence, the applicant(s) have a prima facie arguable case in their favour.
In case the Courts concur with the preposition of law laid down by the High Court of Bombay; it would be a travesty of justice if the applicant(s) are directed to face the trial before the learned Trial Court.
10. Consequently, the applications are allowed and the proceeding pending in case ST No. 9-CC/7 of 2007, titled as State of H.P. vs. Satinder Mohan and others, pending before the learned Special Judge, Sirmour at Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P are ordered to be stayed in both the cases till further orders.
11. The observations made hereinbefore shall remain confined to the disposal of the applications and will have no bearing, whatsoever, on the merits of the case. The application stands disposed of.
Cr. Revision No. 5 of 2022 and Cr. Revision No. 150 of 2022.
12. List for hearing alongwith connected matters in due course.
(Rakesh Kainthla) Judge May 30, 2024(ravinder) ::: Downloaded on - 30/05/2024 20:37:00 :::CIS