Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Then can it be said that trials cannot be allowed to proceed simultaneously upon the same issue in different Courts because simultaneity is essentially wrong and one trial either the civil or the criminal must, therefore, be stayed. Simultaneous trials may have their disadvantages, but when in any circumstances the two several Courts must try the same issue, there is no reason to prefer consecutive trials. It is not as though the trial which is taken first would absorb or govern the other. A Criminal Court cannot decline to examine a question of forgery, because the forged document has been admitted as genuine in a Civil Court; it must try the case sooner or later and on the general principle that judicial work should not be retarded the sooner the better.

(i) Is the accused likely to be prejudiced if the criminal proceeding is not stayed until the disposal of the suit? I have already dealt with the general type-design objections which are put forward and the observations of Jackson, J. in regard thereto. Therefore, the kind of prejudice which we have to consider is the particular prejudice in certain types of cases where the non-stay of criminal proceedings would be hurtful to the accused. The following are some of the instances. In -- 'Sankarayya v. Kerala Subba Aiya', 2 Weir 260 it was held that where there, was a complaint of forgery of document and the question of genuineness of this document was pending in a civil court, criminal proceedings should be stayed. In --'Anna Ayyar v. Emperor', 30 Mad 226 petitioners 2 to 4 filed under Section 77, Registration Act, a civil suit for the registration of a will alleged to have been made by their sister S and written by petitioner 6 and attested by Nos. 7 to 9. While the suit was pending the counter-petitioner without obtaining sanction preferred a complaint before the Magistrate against the petitioners alleging that they had forged the said will of S. Petitioners applied to the Magistrate to stay proceedings in the criminal case until the civil suit should be decided. The High Court in these circumstances directed that the criminal proceedings be stayed pending the trials of the suit.

(vii) Does the criminal prosecution in any way arise out of the civil suit and would the decision in the civil Court necessary affect the decision in the criminal Court?: -- 'Mathura Kunwar v. Durga Kumvar', 2 All L J 747: 2 Cri L J 793. Otherwise, it would be unreasonable and speculative to order stay of proceedings in the criminal Court. In -- 'U. Tha Zan v. U Pyant', AIR 1935 Rang 487. It was rightly pointed out that it is no doubt undesirable that a criminal prosecution connected with a civil suit should be proceeded with until the civil suit is decided; but such cases are usually those where the criminal prosecutions arise directly out of the proceedings of the civil Court such as for instance the prosecutions for perjury or forgery in relation to documents put in evidence in the civil Court. It would, therefore, be unreasonable and speculative to order stay of proceedings in the criminal Court on the off-chance that there might be some decision in the civil Court which might have some bearing on the criminal prosecution; see -- 'Mt. Sudeshara v. Emperor', AIR 1933 All 818; --'Molhu Rai v. Emperor', AIR 1937 Pat 8 and -- 'Palani Goundan v. Emperor', 1937 Mad W N 21.