1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION jmi COMPANY APPLICATION NO.930 OF 2009 IN COMPANY APPLICATION (L) NO.871 OF 2009. In the scheme of Compromise between City Realcom Ltd And its Creditors. City Realcom Ltd. ..Applicant. .... Ms. Alpana Ghone, a/w. Mr. Simil Purohit, a/w. Mr. V.K. Maurya, i/b. V. N. Associates, for Applicant. .... CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 23RD SEPTEMBER 2009. P.C. This application is filed by the applicants under section 391(6) of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking a stay on all the civil and criminal proceedings arising out of the dues of the Class-A and Class- B creditors including but not limited to the proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, against the applicant company and its Directors. 2. As regards stay on criminal proceedings, in the following three decisions of this Court it is already held that criminal 2 proceedings cannot be stayed under section 391(6) of the Companies Act, 1956 :- (i) State of Tamil Nadu v/s. Uma Investments Private Limited, Vol.47 Company Cases 242 (ii) G.E Capital Services India v/s. Sharp Industries Limited, 2005(1) BCR 13; and (iii) Decision reported in 1999 (1) LJ 288 (NOC). I am in complete agreement with the views expressed by the learned Judges in the aforesaid decisions and I hold that section 391(6) of the Companies Act, 1956 is not applicable to criminal cases. 3. As regards the stay on civil proceedings, in the present application, the applicants have not set out any particulars pertaining to the civil proceedings which are sought to be stayed. Hence, the question of passing any orders qua the civil proceedings does not arise. However, the applicants may take out a fresh application seeking stay on civil proceedings if so advised, which will be heard and decided on its own merits. 3 4. Accordingly, company application stands disposed of with no order as to costs. [ S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. ]