1 mp t IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5594 of 2008 Editor of Sindhudurg Samachar, Shri Bahusaheb Hari Kadam .. Petitioner versus Vikas G. Dhas .. Respondent ... Mr.Amit Borkar for the petitioner. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED : 1st September 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner. 2. There is no substance in the argument of the petitioner that even after filing written statement in the civil suit pending against the petitioner, petitioner is entitled to claim privilege of not disclosing his defence in the civil suit so that the criminal action pending against him in relation to the same cause of action is proceeded without causing 2 him any embarassment. 3. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of our High Court in the case of Arvind Kalidas Wadodkar Vs. Ramdas Devidas Joshi reported in 1992 Mh.L.J. 907 and another decision reported in 1998(2) Mh.L.J. 112 in the case of Ramanand Nanakram Ladda Vs. Dr.Kacharulal Amolakchand Lodha. None of these authorities will be of any avail to the petitioner. In both these cases, the stand taken by the defendant was that he cannot be compelled to file written statement which would make him disclose his defence causing him embarrassment in the criminal action pending against him for the same subject matter. That principle cannot be invoked where the defendant has already filed his written statement in the civil suit without invoking the privilege of forced disclosure of defence in the civil suit may inevitably result in causing him embarrassment in the criminal action. 4. To get over this position, counsel for the petitioner would contend that even if written statement is filed that would make no difference as the essence of the privilege is that the defendant should not be embarrassed on account of the finding in the civil action which can be used against him in 3 the criminal action. This submission is devoid of merits. In the first place once the written statement is filed, the defendant has already taken a stand in the civil action. The argument of embarassment being caused to the person would arise only when no stand has already been taken by him in the civil court. Besides, it is well settled that both the actions will have to be proceeded on its own merits on the basis of evidence adduced in the respective actions. The standard of proof in both the actions is entirely different. The finding of the civil suit need not bind the defendant in the criminal action as the charge against the defendant in the criminal action will have to be proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. For that, the prosecution will have to adduce evidence in support of its allegations against the defendant. Thus understood, this petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. Hence, petition is rejected. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)