'^ •S :'issBSS'i •'•f.SSW.i-^ *iy'^/^ (^. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (Art. 227) No.5531 of2010 PETITIONER/: (Plaintiff) RESPONDENT/: (Defendant) Bramhanand Khyani, S/o Late Shri Kanhaiya Lal Khyani, Aged about 48 years, R/o Ashok Kirana Stores, Deviganj Road, Ambikapur, Tahsil Ambikapur Distt. Sarguja (C.G.) Versus Shyam Narayan Pandey S/o Late Shri Ramkripal Pandey, aged about 36 years, Occupation Advocacy, R/o Near Jaiswal Chitra Mandir, KedarpurNagar, Ambikapur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) {Writ petitionunderArticle 227 ofthe Constitution of India} Present: Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Astiok Kumar Shukla, counsel for the respondent. 81» SLnAleBenchiHon'bJeMr.T.P^SharmaLJ ORDER (6-9-2011) 1. By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of tndia, the petitioner has challenged legality and propriety of the order dated 23-7- 2010 passed by the 1 Civil Judge Class-1, Ambikapur, in Civil Suit No.7- A/2006, whereby the trial Court has dismissed the application filed under Section 10 ofthe Code ofdvil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the Code'), on behalf of the petitioner herein. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned, copy of the complaint and other documents. 3. The petitioner herein has filed Civil Suit No.7-A/2006 which is pending before the trial court at the stage of final hearing. The respondent herein has filed complaint against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 447, 294 & 506B of the IPC which is pending for consideration before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambikapur. By filing application under Section 10 of the Code, the petitioner herein wy^ W L^^.: 1 "^ w '. •^y// ..^' •^-^VsS^'' Soma /•——^ has prayed forstay of the civil suit till the decision in the criminal^—^ complaint filed againsthim. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is facing criminal trial based on the complaint on the basis of same set of facts which is subject matter of present suit. Therefore, present suit is required to be stayed under Section 10 of the Code, till the decision of the criminal case. Learned counsel placed reliance in the matter of New Bank of India v. M/s. Radhakishan & Co. and others (1988 JU 687) in which the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has held that in case of pendency of civil suit and criminal case on same cause of action, civil suit should be stayed. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh has further held that evidence of accused in civil suit would amount to compelling the accused for giving evidence against him and that amounts to testimonial compulsion. f. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the petition and submits that in the present suit, both the parties have concluded their evidence and the case is fixed for final arguments. Civil suit and complaint are not suit in accordancfe with Section 10 of the Code. Therefore, proceeding of present suit cannot be stayed. 6. The order impugned reveals that the civil suit has been fixed for final arguments, both the parties have closed their evidence and nothing remains for the parties to prove or dispute any facts. Even otherwise, complaint of the prosecution is not suit in terms of Section 10 of the Code. Therefore, by dismissing the applicationunder Section 10 of the Code, the trial Court has not committed any illegality. 1 do not any substance in the petition for exercise of supervisory jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd./- T.P. Sharma Judge -^•-Sffi-"