DHARMARTH TRUST Vs. HARI CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit for mandatory injunction directing the defendant -respondent to handover possession of land measuring 13 kanals 17 marlas forming part of Khasra No. 186 situate in village Nowabad, Jammu, is pending disposal in the court and Sub -Registrar (Munsiff), Jammu. The respondent moved an application before the trail court, under Sec. 151 C. P. C., to the effect that proceedings of the case be stayed till the decision of a criminal case pending against him under Sec. 477. R. P C. in regard to the said land. The trail court accepted the application of the defendant and stayed the proceedings of the present case holding that the continuance of the proceedings would embarrass and prejudice him in effectively contesting the criminal case. Aggrieved by this order, the plaintiff -petitioner has filed the present revision petition.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The point for determination in this case is as to whether the civil proceedings should be stayed where criminal proceedings in regard to the same subject matter are pending. This question came up for consideration in case M. S. Sharief and Anr. Versus State of Madras AIR 1954 S C 397 in which their Lordships of the Supreme Court, held as under: -

(3.) ANOTHER factor which weighs with us is that a civil suit often drags on for years and it is undesirable that a criminal prosecution should wait till everybody concerned has forgotten all about the crime. The public interest demands that criminal justice should be swift and sure; that the guilty should be punished while the events are still fresh in the public mind; that the innocent should be absolved as early as is consistent with a fair and impartial trial. Another reason is that it is undesirable to let things slide till memories have grown too dim to trust.