JAMUNA BIN Vs. RAMANI MOHAN BARMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision petition is directed against the order of the Addl. Sessions Judge Tripura D/ - 10 -11 -70 confirming the order Dt. 25 -11 -68 passed by the Magistrate, 2nd class, Agartala refusing to stay the proceedings in Cr. Case No. 550 of 67, under Section 344 Cr. P.C.

(2.) ON a complaint filed on 19 -7 -67 by one Shri Ramani Mohan Barman, the respondent herein. Shri Jamuna Bin the revision petitioner and 5 others are prosecuted for offences under Sections 447 and 379 I. P.C. in that on 17 -7 -67 they have trespassed into the land in the possession of the respondent and committed theft of paddy crop. The said case was taken on file as CR. 550 of 67 for an offence Under Section 379 IPC. In respect of the very land from which the accused are alleged to have committed theft of paddy crop, there were proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P.C. (misc. case 35 of 65) between the respondent herein and Jamuna Bin the revision petitioner, and in those proceedings on 4 -11 -61 the learned Magistrate passed an order directing that the disputed land shall remain in possession of the respondent herein till evicted in due course of law. Aggrieved by the said order, Jamuna Bin the revision petitioner filed a suit T. Section 104 of 66 for declaration of his title to the land in question and for confirmation of his possession. While that suit was pending the respondent filed the private complaint referred to above. Jamuna Bin and the other accused filed a petition under Section 344 Cr. P.C. in C. R. 550 of 67 before the 2nd Class Magistrate for stay of proceeding of the criminal case pending disposal of the Civil Suit on the ground that the question of title and possession of the land which are to be decided in the civil suit would practically decide the guilt or otherwise of the accused in the criminal case.

(3.) SECTION 344 Crl. P.C. provides that in every enquiry or trial the proceedings shall be held as expeditiously as possible and in particular, when the examination of witnesses has once begun. the same shall be continued from day to day. Sub -section (1) (A) thereof gives a discretion to the Court to postpone the commencement of or adjourn any enquiry or trial if it becomes necessary or desirable either due to the absence of a witness or any other reasonable cause. Sometimes a criminal case is requested to be stayed pending disposal of a civil case between the parties on the same subject matter. In such a case as to whether a criminal case has to be stayed or not is a matter entirely one of discretion to be exercised by the court having regard to the merits and all the circumstances of the case. One of the tests would be whether the accused is likely to be seriously prejudiced by the continuance of the criminal proceedings against him during the pendency of the civil proceedings. Public interests demand that criminal justice should be swift in that the guilty should be punished while the events are still fresh in the mind of the witnesses and the innocent should be absolved as early as is consistent with a fair and impartial trial. As between civil and criminal proceeding between the parties, ordinarily criminal matters should be given preference.