LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

lawweb   01 April 2018

Whether trial court can restart proceeding if extending stay

Whether trial court can restart proceeding if extending stay is not produced after period of six months?

 
 In view of above, situation of proceedings remaining pending for long on account of stay needs to be remedied. Remedy is required not only for corruption cases but for all civil and criminal cases where on account of stay, civil and criminal proceedings are held up. At times, proceedings are adjourned sine die on account of stay. Even after stay is vacated, intimation is not received and proceedings are not taken up. In an attempt to remedy this, situation, we consider it appropriate to direct that in all pending cases where stay against proceedings of a civil or criminal trial is operating, the same will come to an end on expiry of six months from today unless in an exceptional case by a speaking order such stay is extended. In cases where stay is granted in future, the same will end on expiry of six months from the date of such order unless similar extension is granted by a speaking order. The speaking order must show that the case was of such exceptional nature that continuing the stay was more important than having the trial finalized. The trial Court where order of stay of civil or criminal proceedings is produced, may fix a date not beyond six months of the order of stay so that on expiry of period of stay, proceedings can commence unless order of extension of stay is produced.
 
36. Thus, we declare the law to be that order framing charge is not purely an interlocutory order nor a final order. Jurisdiction of the High Court is not barred irrespective of the label of a petition, be it Under Sections 397 or 482 Code of Criminal Procedure or Article 227 of the Constitution. However, the said jurisdiction is to be exercised consistent with the legislative policy to ensure expeditious disposal of a trial without the same being in any manner hampered. Thus considered, the challenge to an order of charge should be entertained in a rarest of rare case only to correct a patent error of jurisdiction and not to re-appreciate the matter. Even where such challenge is entertained and stay is granted, the matter must be decided on day-to-day basis so that stay does not operate for an unduly long period. Though no mandatory time limit may be fixed, the decision may not exceed two-three months normally. If it remains pending longer, duration of stay should not exceed six months, unless extension is granted by a specific speaking order, as already indicated. Mandate of speedy justice applies to the PC Act cases as well as other cases where at trial stage proceedings are stayed by the higher court i.e. the High Court or a court below the High Court, as the case may be. In all pending matters before the High Courts or other courts relating to PC Act or all other civil or criminal cases, where stay of proceedings in a pending trial is operating, stay will automatically lapse after six months from today unless extended by a speaking order on above parameters. Same course may also be adopted by civil and criminal appellate/revisional courts under the jurisdiction of the High Courts. The trial courts may, on expiry of above period, resume the proceedings without waiting for any other intimation unless express order extending stay is produced.
 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
 
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1375-1376 of 2013, 
 
Decided On: 28.03.2018
 
 Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.
Vs.
Central Burueau of Investigation
 
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
A.K. Goel, Navin Sinha and Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ.


Learning

 1 Replies

Deepak Dahiya   04 April 2018

Posted by: Nitish Banka  Categories: Civil Law Criminal Law 
 

 

The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed that the stay in trials, in both civil and criminal cases, must not exceed beyond six months unless extended in exceptional circumstances. “We … direct that in all pending cases where stay against proceedings of a civil or criminal trial is operating, the same will come to an end on expiry of six months from today unless in an exceptional case by a speaking order, such stay is extended”, said the bench of Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel and Justice Navin Sinha,

Image result for supreme court

“The speaking order must show that the case was of such exceptional nature that continuing the stay was more important than having the trial finalized,” the bench added. The apex court also ruled that the lower courts could proceed after a six month period. This, the court observed, will prevent the accused from dragging the trial further.

The court further added that all the pending cases in connection with the Prevention of Corruption Act or all other civil or criminal cases, “stay will automatically lapse after six months from today unless extended by a speaking order on above parameters.” The court believed that a stay in the trials or prolonged trials often results in frustrated victims.

“It is well accepted that delay in a criminal trial, particularly in the PC Act cases, has a deleterious effect on the administration of justice in which the society has a vital interest. Delay in trial affects the faith in rule of law and efficacy of the legal system. It affects social welfare and development,” it said.

“Even in civil or tax cases it has been laid down that power to grant stay has to be exercised with restraint. Mere prima facie case is not enough. The party seeking the stay must be put to terms and the stay should not be incentive to delay. The order granting a stay must show application of mind. The power to grant a stay is coupled with accountability,” the bench added.

The court asked the high courts to issue instructions to this effect and monitor the same so that civil or criminal proceedings do not remain pending for unduly period at the trial stage.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register