Trial Court Not Empowered Under CrPC To Stay Its Own Proceedings: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore has underscored that a trial court cannot stay its own proceedings in a criminal case and the adjudication of a connected civil case has no bearing on the proceedings in a criminal case.

The single-judge bench of Justice Vivek Rusia held that the Criminal Procedure Code does not confer any authority on the trial court to stay its own proceedings in a trial.

“…Once the charge sheet has been filed then accused either can be discharged or convicted by the Trial Court. There is no such provision to stay the trial by the Trial Court itself. At the most High Court by exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or Superior Jurisdictional Revisional Power can quash or stay the proceedings but Trial Court itself cannot stay the proceedings…”, the court clarified.

The bench relied on Kailash v. Arjun Singh and others (2022) where the Magistrate’s order rejecting a criminal complaint owing to the pendency of a civil suit was set aside by the Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court. The court dismissed the respondent’s contention that the trial court can’t go forward with the criminal case when the validity of the sale agreement and receipt is under the High Court’s consideration in the First Appeal.

In Kailash Singh, the High Court had clearly laid down the following as the settled proposition of law:

“…the law on the issue stands crystallised to the effect that the findings of fact recorded by the civil court do not have any bearing so far as the criminal case is concerned and vice versa. Standard of proof is different in civil and criminal cases. In civil cases it is preponderance of probabilities while in criminal cases it is proof beyond reasonable doubt. There is neither any statutory nor any legal principle that findings recorded by the court either in civil or criminal proceedings shall be binding between the same parties while dealing with the same subject-matter and both the cases have to be decided on the basis of the evidence adduced therein.”, the High Court had noted then in April 2022.

The High Court also made certain remarks about the perils of allowing a criminal case to be left pending for several years.

“There is no definite time period in which First Appeal No.319/2017 would be decided by this Court and if the Trial remain stayed for years together, the memories of complainant and respondent may be fade and witnesses would not be available or possibility of their hostility cannot be ruled out, therefore, the trial court has committed an error in staying the proceedings of trial by traveling beyond its jurisdiction.”

Accordingly, the court directed the trial court to proceed further with the trial.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Jayraj Choubey, was challenging the order of 7^th Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain that granted a stay on the criminal proceedings right before the hearing on charges, citing the pendency of the first appeal before the High Court, arising from the civil suit. Earlier, a criminal complaint was filed by the petitioner under Section 200 Cr.P.C alleging that an agreement of sale was forged by the respondent. It was also alleged that a receipt of Rs 1,50,000/- was also fabricated by the respondent in an attempt to grab hold of the land of the petitioner. In 2017, the court took cognizance of the alleged offences that include Sections 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 467(Forgery of Valuable Security, Will etc.), 468 (Forgery for purpose of cheating) and 471 (Using as genuine a forged document) of IPC, and issued summons to the respondent.

In 2011, the respondent had filed a civil suit for specific performance which was dismissed later in 2017. The respondent preferred the first appeal against the said order which is currently pending before the High Court. The trial court then stayed the proceedings in the criminal case when the respondent filed an application citing the pendency of the first appeal.

Case Title: Jayraj Choubey v. Dinesh Pujari

Case No: Misc. Criminal Case No. 9533 of 2022

Click Here To Read/ Download Order