Concurrent civil and criminal proceedings

Object of a civil proceeding is to enforce civil rights and obligations while that of a criminal proceeding is to punish the offender for the commission of an offence

Therefore, both the civil proceeding and criminal proceeding relating to one and the same matter can be instituted and ordinarily proceeded with simultaneously

Although there is no bar to the simultaneous institution of both proceedings, the trial in the criminal proceeding may be stopped in certain circumstances

Guiding principle in this regard is that where the criminal liability is dependent upon or intimately connected with the result of the civil proceeding and it is difficult to draw a line between a bona fide claim and the criminal act alleged, the trial in the criminal proceeding may be postponed till the conclusion of the civil proceeding

Thus, where either of these two conditions is not fulfilled, i.e., where the subject matter of civil proceeding and that of criminal proceeding are distinct, not intimately connected, or where the civil proceeding is instituted mala fide to delay the criminal prosecution, not bona fide, the criminal proceeding may not be stayed.

In the former, a mere preponderance of probability is sufficient to decide the disputed fact but in the latter, the guilt of the accused must be proved beyond any reasonable doubt

Therefore, there are chances of giving divergent judgments by the civil and criminal courts on the facts that give rise to both civil and criminal liabilities.

There is no bar on the institution of civil proceedings on a cause which is also the subject matter of criminal proceedings because not only the object of proceedings is different but also the standard and onus of proof is different in the civil and criminal proceedings.

Where an act or omission constitutes a criminal offence as well as a civil wrong, the mere fact that an accused has been acquitted from a criminal charge does not ipso facto mean that he stands absolved from civil liability

Criminal and departmental proceedings against an employee can go side by side and may even end in varying results

Departmental and criminal proceedings can be taken simultaneously and are independent of each other

Acquittal in a criminal case would not constitute a bar for the initiation of the disciplinary proceedings

Criminal proceedings and departmental proceedings against a civil servant are entirely different as one relates to the enforcement of criminal liability and the other is concerned with service discipline.

There is no bar on the institution of civil proceedings on a cause which is also the subject matter of criminal proceedings because not only the object of proceedings is different but also the standard and onus of proof is different in the civil and criminal proceedings.

Object behind the enactment of Protection against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010, is to protect a woman from being harassed at the workplace

Inquiry proceedings conducted by the Ombudsperson pursuant to a complaint filed by an employee under S.8(1) are not criminal proceedings

Section 8(3) of the Act provides that the Ombudsperson shall conduct an inquiry into the matter according to the rules made under the Act and conduct proceedings as the Ombudsperson deems proper

Under S.10(2), the Ombudsperson, while making a decision on a complaint, can impose any of the minor or major penalties specified in S. 4(4) of the Act.

First Information Report cannot be quashed or cancelled because matter pertains to civil liability or for that matter on account of pendency of any civil lis

Civil and criminal proceedings can go side by side simultaneously.

Criminal as well as civil proceedings could continue side by side if the same were spelled out on the basis of a cogent foundation.

No universal principle that whenever a civil suit and a criminal case involved similar or identical subject matters the proceedings before the criminal court must necessarily be stayed.