2022 PCrLJ 1050
Civil and criminal proceedings---Scope---If an offence is also an actionable wrong, affected person is not precluded to claim damages even though accused stood acquitted from criminal charge on same facts and such claim would neither be hit by principle of res judicata nor by double jeopardy.
Civil and criminal proceedings---Scope---Disciplinary and criminal proceedings can go side by side and there is no bar for their simultaneous prosecution.
Civil and criminal proceedings---Scope---Civil and criminal proceedings go side by side due to their ultimate outcome and difference in standard of proof---Even after Civil proceedings, there is no bar for initiation of criminal proceedings and vice versa; evidence recorded in one proceeding cannot be read in other proceedings except in some cases where any question in criminal proceedings wholly and entirely depends upon the determination by Civil court.
. 249-A---Power of Magistrate to acquit accused at any stage---Second FIR---Civil and criminal proceedings---Scope---Accused assails dismissal of his application under S. 249-A, Cr.P.C.---Counsel for accused contended that the instant FIR was replica of earlier FIR, which was quashed by the High Court; that second FIR on same facts was barred under the law; that Civil proceedings between the parties were also pending; that both Civil and criminal proceedings could not go side by side and requests for stay of criminal proceedings till the decision of Civil litigation by declaring that criminal proceedings were dependent upon the outcome of Civil litigation---Second FIR was based on entirely different facts and premise---Even the nature of documents was different; therefore, it could not be termed as replica or verbatim of earlier FIR---Second FIR was proceed-able under the law---Question of inheritance was pending before the Civil court, if the proof failed, party would lose the inheritance, would be deprived of the property and nothing more---Even after a criminal trial, a Civil action on the same cause of action was not barred; neither principle of res judicata was applied nor question of autrefois acquit, autrefois convict (previously acquitted and previously convicted), arises---Order passed by Trial Court on application of accused was well reasoned and based on established principles of law---Criminal revision being devoid of merit was dismissed accordingly
0 Comments